Return to BSD News archive
Path: euryale.cc.adfa.oz.au!newshost.carno.net.au!harbinger.cc.monash.edu.au!news.cs.su.oz.au!metro!metro!munnari.OZ.AU!news.ecn.uoknor.edu!news.wildstar.net!serv.hinet.net!news-peer.nctu.edu.tw!news.nctu.edu.tw!spring.edu.tw!news-peer.gsl.net!news.gsl.net!news.maxwell.syr.edu!news.bc.net!uvaix3e1.comp.UVic.CA!usenet From: The Laughing Fool <fool@uvic.ca> Newsgroups: comp.os.linux.misc,comp.unix.bsd.misc Subject: Re: Linux vs BSD Date: Wed, 12 Feb 1997 01:15:43 -0800 Organization: Irresponsible people armed with unix Lines: 52 Message-ID: <33018A3F.1E36FE07@uvic.ca> References: <32DFFEAB.7704@usa.net> <32F54717.41C67EA6@freebsd.org> <5Pp9y0gTzz1B091yn@ibm.net> <5d81k0$8j4@cynic.portal.ca> <E575K5.4yq@bigbird.telly.org> <32FA68A9.167EB0E7@freebsd.org> NNTP-Posting-Host: p18-93.dialup.uvic.ca Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.01 (X11; I; Linux 2.0.29 i586) Xref: euryale.cc.adfa.oz.au comp.os.linux.misc:158702 comp.unix.bsd.misc:2511 John S. Dyson wrote: > > Evan Leibovitch wrote: > > > > In article <5d81k0$8j4@cynic.portal.ca>, > > Curt Sampson <cjs@cynic.portal.ca> wrote: > > > > > >All the GNU licence does is prevent a certain type > > >of commercial exploitation, which is at best neutral, and at worst > > >a handicap. > > > > Handicap to whom? > > > The developers who apply the technologies in Linux, piece by piece > or as a whole, incorporated into finished product. This is a problem > when Linux has to be substantially modified to work for that > application. It is very likely that the IP will be encumbered > under the GPL. That is a HUGE negative for Linux, sorry... > > On the desktop, FreeBSD can run most Linux applications, and in > fact is pretty much a bug-for-bug emulation. Linux is not > generally overly encumbered for 3rd party developers, however > the LGPL *could* make their lives a little more difficult due > to the need to dynamically link (you know, the library of the > month problem), or to offer link packages (which isn't a real > problem, just yet another problem.) > > As far as 3rd party product, Linux's license terms aren't any > worse (or much, if any better) than NT or SCO. > > > > > If FreeBSD is less handicapped than Linux in terms of commercial > > explotation potential, someone forgot to tell the exploiters. > > > FreeBSD has more exploitation potential, but Linux is being > used more on the desktop. Frankly, we are vastly better accepted > and trusted in our market than Linux is... (BTW, I sure hope > that the exploiters are supplying link kits or don't have problems > with the library-of-the-month problem.) > > (BTW, most all of those commercial exploits of Linux, are also > potential exploits of FreeBSD -- isn't it cool!!!) I buy > software meant for Linux and use it -- and it runs great!!! > > Kind of (Win 3.1 is to Win NT) is like (Linux is to FreeBSD). > > John Bitter. You are bitttttter. Relax boy, unixes fighting each other: bad scene. The Superiourity of Unix A over Unix B... I've been hearing this since 1982.