Date: Sun, 17 Dec 2006 13:57:32 -0800 From: Doug Barton <dougb@FreeBSD.org> To: Ensel Sharon <user@dhp.com> Cc: freebsd-emulation@freebsd.org Subject: Re: legal use of vmware on FreeBSD _not possible_ (informational) Message-ID: <4585BD4C.2030604@FreeBSD.org> In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.4.21.0612171625130.21120-100000@shell.dhp.com> References: <Pine.LNX.4.21.0612171625130.21120-100000@shell.dhp.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Ensel Sharon wrote:
>
> On Sun, 17 Dec 2006, Doug Barton wrote:
>
>> Ensel Sharon wrote:
>>
>>> For reasons difficult to discern, FreeBSD has not put any priority at all
>>> on support for vmware, and for continuing the working, usable support for
>>> vmware3 running in linux binary compat mode.
>> It's not difficult to discern at all. This is a volunteer project. No
>> one has volunteered to maintain this. Q.E.D.
>
>
> It's difficult to discern why it has been allowed to degrade.
Apparently you didn't read the paragraph you quoted above.
>>> Your only other option is to break the law
>> Please don't give legal advice. You're obviously not a lawyer, and you
>> obviously don't understand the law.
>
>
> Wrong.
I don't care how much you think you understand about vmware licensing
terms. Your statement, "Your only other option is to break the law"
clearly demonstrates that you don't actually understand anything about
_the law_, which is what I suggested that you stop giving advice about.
> I embarked on a two month long quest with vmware to get them to
> please, please just let me pay them money for a 3.0 license. It can't be
> done. I was advised in _no uncertain terms_ that if I found some other
> way to obtain a v3.x license I would be _breaking the law_.
--
This .signature sanitized for your protection
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?4585BD4C.2030604>