Return to BSD News archive
Path: sserve!newshost.anu.edu.au!harbinger.cc.monash.edu.au!simtel!zombie.ncsc.mil!news.mathworks.com!news.kei.com!nntp.et.byu.edu!news.byu.edu!hamblin.math.byu.edu!park.uvsc.edu!usenet
From: Terry Lambert <terry@cs.weber.edu>
Newsgroups: comp.unix.bsd.freebsd.misc
Subject: Re: Slight flame from Linux user
Date: 5 Jun 1995 20:14:37 GMT
Organization: Utah Valley State College, Orem, Utah
Lines: 30
Message-ID: <3qvojd$n14@park.uvsc.edu>
References: <3ql3gd$je2@bell.maths.tcd.ie> <D9K4Iz.BJM@midway.uchicago.edu> <MMEAD.95Jun4013608@Glock.COM>
NNTP-Posting-Host: hecate.artisoft.com
mmead@Glock.COM (matthew c. mead) wrote:
] You're probably going to have to. In a lot of people's opinion,
] the GPL is ass backwards about what you can and cannot do with someone
] else's "freely available" code. I'm not saying we're right; I'm just
] saying that's our opinion. The GPL endorsers can bloody well have their
] own opinion, but the fact that those of us don't believe in the GPL's
] philosophies may mean that FreeBSD won't have GPL'd code for a function
] which Berkeley licensed code performs just as adequately.
Get the file system and drivers released under LGPL and they can
be loaded as kernel modules without removing the patch/source
distribution requirements AND without causing the rest of the
code to become "contaminated". Unlike shared libraries, which
have GPL'ed code stubs and GPL'ed data declarations statically
linked into the resulting binary, a kernel module load is a complete
relink, so unlike shared libs, it complies with LGPL.
] GCC is a different story since there is (to my knowledge) no free
] Berkeley licensed compiler.
There is. It's just not hosted on as many platforms. There some
indication that it produces tighter code (at least that's been
reported to be the case) than GCC.
Terry Lambert
terry@cs.weber.edu
---
Any opinions in this posting are my own and not those of my present
or previous employers.