*BSD News Article 14599


Return to BSD News archive

Xref: sserve comp.os.linux:34641 comp.os.386bsd.questions:1676
Newsgroups: comp.os.linux,comp.os.386bsd.questions
Path: sserve!newshost.anu.edu.au!munnari.oz.au!network.ucsd.edu!usc!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!uwm.edu!cs.utexas.edu!uunet!mcsun!news.funet.fi!hydra!klaava!wirzeniu
From: wirzeniu@klaava.Helsinki.FI (Lars Wirzenius)
Subject: Re: Summary of Linux vs. 386BSD vs. Commercial Unixes
Message-ID: <1993Apr17.193029.5707@klaava.Helsinki.FI>
Organization: University of Helsinki
References: <1qo0lq$1hm4@hal.gnu.ai.mit.edu> <1993Apr17.161516.2794@serval.net.wsu.edu> <1993Apr17.175431.25015@coe.montana.edu>
Date: Sat, 17 Apr 1993 19:30:29 GMT
Lines: 24

nate@cs.montana.edu (Nate Williams) writes:
>And then Linux and the GNU folks will take what 386BSD has done and
>restrict it.  Now, isn't that nice....... taking my work and restricting
>it.  I always thought that was awful kind of them. (NOT!)

I would be interested if you would be kind enough to elaborate on
this.  As far as I know, nothing that Linux or GNU (which have little
to do with each other, except that Linux uses a lot of GNU programs)
has imported has been made available under a different copyright
notice than what the copyright holder (typically the author) has
agreed to.  Anything else would be illegal.

One similar example would be when 386bsd imported Linus' math
emulator: the copyright was changed to the same style that the rest of
the 386bsd kernel uses, when it originally was under the GPL.  (The
change was done with Linus' complete approval, I haste to add.)

(The article I'm replying to might have been a complete flame-bait,
articles of that type usually are, but sometimes I can't resist
answering such articles.  Color me a sucker.)

--
Lars.Wirzenius@helsinki.fi  (finger wirzeniu@klaava.helsinki.fi)
   MS-DOS, you can't live with it, you can live without it.