Return to BSD News archive
Path: sserve!newshost.anu.edu.au!harbinger.cc.monash.edu.au!yeshua.marcam.com!charnel!charnel.net.csuchico.edu!nic-nac.CSU.net!usc!howland.reston.ans.net!noc.near.net!ipswitch!ddlgw!ddl From: ddl@harvard.edu (Dan Lanciani) Newsgroups: comp.os.386bsd.questions Subject: Re: *BSD ILLEGAL??? Message-ID: <305@ddlgw.UUCP> Date: 22 Apr 94 17:58:54 GMT References: <2ok76t$h81@Mercury.mcs.com> <hastyCoGwJt.LrL@netcom.com> Organization: Internet Lines: 28 In article <hastyCoGwJt.LrL@netcom.com>, hasty@netcom.com (Amancio Hasty Jr) writes: | Interesting, I think that USL or UCB should make a public statement | about thi;specially, if net2 is still accesible on the net. | | It sounds to me like a scam -- if portions of the net2 are not | the property of UCB then why are they still available. Is not | like they have to dig through tons of code to extract | the files belonging to Novell... I find this all very odd. Well, I think I'm beginning to understand this. But I hope I'm wrong. It seems that the list of files that are further restricted is not available to the public, i.e., those who have the info are under non-disclosure. Removing those files from the ftp sites would implicitly provide the list to anyone who took the time to diff the trees. Without the list, it appears that anybody currently using NET2 must either switch wholesale to 4.4lite or make private arrangements with USL and/or Berkeley to find out more details. The former could be problematical depending on how much effort someone had invested in the NET2 tree and the extent to which such previous work was considered contaminated. There seems to be no obvious way, given only public information, to take a NET2-derived product and ``clean'' it by backtracking the contested files (since we don't know the contested files). Dan Lanciani ddl@harvard.*