Return to BSD News archive
Newsgroups: comp.os.386bsd.questions Path: sserve!newshost.anu.edu.au!harbinger.cc.monash.edu.au!msuinfo!agate!doc.ic.ac.uk!uknet!cf-cm!isl-gate.elsy.cf.ac.uk!paul From: paul@isl-gate.elsy.cf.ac.uk (Paul) Subject: Re: NetBSD-0.9 to FreeBSD-??? Message-ID: <1994Jul23.133338.1925@cm.cf.ac.uk> Sender: paul@isl-gate.elsy.cf.ac.uk (Paul) Organization: ELSYM, University of Wales, College of Cardiff, UK. References: <3031ps$d1u@dopey.cc.utexas.edu> <michaelv.774191014@ponderous.cc.iastate.edu> <1994Jul15.102530.17910@cm.cf.ac.uk> <MYCROFT.94Jul19142240@duality.gnu.ai.mit.edu> Date: Sat, 23 Jul 1994 13:33:37 +0000 Lines: 23 In article <MYCROFT.94Jul19142240@duality.gnu.ai.mit.edu>, Charles M. Hannum <mycroft@duality.gnu.ai.mit.edu> wrote: >That, combined with importing various parts of the user-level code, >including every file on the `hot list', means that there is *no* >encumbered code in NetBSD 1.0. Sorry but this is not true and I HAVE checked the code. This may seem nit-picking and I agree that it is but I don't set the rules that USL play by they do. The files that you still have from Net/2 have different Copyright dates on them and are therefore clearly identifiable as Net/2 files. This means they are legally encumbered as covered by the USL /BSD court case. They maybe identical with the 4.4lite files in EVERY other way but the fact that they are Net/2 files means they're encumbered, period. It's because of these legal technicalities that FreeBSD has taken the road it has and ditched completely all prior releases, if you want to be sure of no comebacks from USL I'd go and check your source tree much more carefully. -- Paul Richards, FreeBSD core team member. Intelligent Systems Laboratory, ELSYM ,University of Wales, College Cardiff Internet: paul@isl.cf.ac.uk, JANET(UK): RICHARDSDP@CARDIFF.AC.UK