*BSD News Article 89594


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!news.ececs.uc.edu!news.kei.com!news.mathworks.com!panix!news.panix.com!usenet
From: perry@jekyll.piermont.com (Perry E. Metzger)
Newsgroups: comp.unix.bsd.netbsd.misc
Subject: Re: Why no addusr?
Date: 16 Feb 1997 00:37:35 -0500
Organization: Partnership for an America Free Drug
Lines: 24
Message-ID: <877mk9tiow.fsf@jekyll.piermont.com>
References: <none-ya023480001912962244220001@news.infi.net>
	<DERAADT.97Feb15103817@zeus.pacifier.com> <5e51l2$gde@cynic.portal.ca>
	<DERAADT.97Feb15150028@zeus.pacifier.com>
	<5e5s0a$oja@news.bayarea.net>
	<DERAADT.97Feb15210103@zeus.pacifier.com>
NNTP-Posting-Host: jekyll.piermont.com
X-Newsreader: Gnus v5.3/Emacs 19.32
Xref: euryale.cc.adfa.oz.au comp.unix.bsd.netbsd.misc:5474


deraadt@theos.com (Theo de Raadt) writes:
>    >Yup, because the NetBSD tree has illegal source code in it.
> 
>    Not only is this a gross misrepresentation of the facts, but your
>    statement makes no sense.  There is no law banning the existence
>    of the source in question.  There is, however, an agreement in place
>    which stipulates certain restrictions on a set of revisions.
> 
> Prove it.
> 
>    The text of this agreement is not public.  Because of this, you cannot
>    have all of the facts.  Therefore, since you don't have the facts, and
>    thus cannot make an accurate statement on this matter, I suggest you
>    refrain from commenting, lest you discredit yourself further.
> 
> I say prove it.  I say you are waving around some little non-existant
> document.

Everyone is well aware of the existance of the settlement of the
BSDI/USL/Berkeley suit, Theo. I don't think this need be proven any
more than anyone need prove that the civil war happened.