*BSD News Article 18017


Return to BSD News archive

Path: sserve!newshost.anu.edu.au!munnari.oz.au!news.Hawaii.Edu!ames!haven.umd.edu!darwin.sura.net!dtix.dt.navy.mil!cs.umd.edu!nocusuhs!Pt!postmaster@hq.af.mil!john
From: john@postmaster@hq.af.mil (John Ryan)
Newsgroups: comp.os.386bsd.development
Subject: Re: 386bsd mach server?
Keywords: Mach
Message-ID: <26440@hq.hq.af.mil>
Date: 6 Jul 93 15:49:29 GMT
References: <20toq3$3mv@calvin.NYU.EDU>
Sender: news@Pt.hq.af.mil
Reply-To: john@hq.af.mil
Organization: 7TH Communications Group
Lines: 47


--
I run a single server mailing list perhaps you'ld like to join...

bsdss-request@nic.hq.af.mil 

Here is where things stand. We have supped the latestest greatest
stuff from CMU  that is freely available. We are using NetBSD
Because it's boot process is more amenable to booting different
kernels, NO POLITICS PLEASE!!, and have compiled the mk sources
succesfully.  We are trying to make this part of Chris's tree,
we wrote him a letter maybe he'll say yes and maybe he'll say no.
Our next step is to get the mk to boot. this doesn't look to bad if
the mk is put on the same root file system.  After that we were
going to put up a patch kit for bsdss4.  Note you can not get 
this from us!! We will only make avialable patches for bsdss4.
It seems to have made the rounds so If you are diligent I am
sure you can find it;-)

Now for the USL vs BSDI stuff.

As you know the New Jersey Court denied USL's motion for preliminary
injunction against BSDI on the grounds of that it was that the case
was unlikely to succede.  This is a strong message from the court
to USL that they have a weak case but it is not a decision and not
a  guarantee!!  BSDI has proceded to do business on the assumtion that
it will win.  Berkeley and CMU have taken a more conservative approach
and decided to withdraw BNR2 code and release it only to holders of
Berkeley licenses.  When will the suit go to trial? The date is not
set and Mike Karels believes it will not  be for over a year.  Well
what about rewriting the dirty parts?  This can not be done because
USL has named the WHOLE of BNR2 in it's suit and not specific,
objectionalble parts. This means that if you did a line by line
comparison and could show that a 386bsd server had nothing to do with 
AT&T code but had one line of BNR2 code that you could still find 
yourself in trouble. If you are running any BNR2 code you have already
accepted this risk. Now if you have a Berkeley license then you can
get bsdss9 from CMU.  If you choose to cut it loose, and the copyright
says you can, then you are well within your rights to do so. Berkeley
may revoke your license, USL may also come after you. You have to
decide to take the risk.  Some people have decided to accept this risk
with bsdss4. No one has decided to accept this risk with bsdss8 or 9.

-------
John Ryan             john@hq.af.mil        ..uunet!hq!john