Return to BSD News archive
Path: euryale.cc.adfa.oz.au!newshost.carno.net.au!harbinger.cc.monash.edu.au!munnari.OZ.AU!news.ecn.uoknor.edu!paladin.american.edu!02-newsfeed.univie.ac.at!01-newsfeed.univie.ac.at!Austria.EU.net!EU.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!newsxfer2.itd.umich.edu!agate!theos.com!deraadt
From: deraadt@theos.com (Theo de Raadt)
Newsgroups: comp.unix.bsd.netbsd.misc
Subject: Re: List of OpenBSD changes
Date: 15 Aug 1996 21:10:44 GMT
Organization: Theo Ports Kernels For Fun And Profit, Inc.
Lines: 40
Message-ID: <DERAADT.96Aug15151044@zeus.theos.com>
References: <DERAADT.96Aug11183115@zeus.theos.com> <v63f1r3im1.fsf@kechara.flame.org>
<DERAADT.96Aug13013402@zeus.theos.com> <Dw6rqy.FEJ@cogsci.ed.ac.uk>
NNTP-Posting-Host: zeus.theos.com
In-reply-to: richard@cogsci.ed.ac.uk's message of Thu, 15 Aug 1996 15:44:58 GMT
In article <Dw6rqy.FEJ@cogsci.ed.ac.uk> richard@cogsci.ed.ac.uk (Richard Tobin) writes:
I don't know what this refers to, but I'd like to point out that
there's no reason to suppose that any BSD code is "illegal".
However, there is definately precedent for calling such code
`tainted', UCB never shipped the code from functions in 7 files.
NetBSD incorporated code from the original 4.4 versions of these
files. Everyone involved in the case knew that those files were an
issue.
In Net/2 and 4.4Lite UCB shipped functions that looked like this:
/*
* Body deleted.
*/
return;
FreeBSD felt worried enough about all this that they started a whole
new CVS tree based on 4.4lite, and eventually deleted their Net2-based
source tree.
Neither
UCB or BSDI admitted any such thing, nor was there any judgment
suggesting it. On the contrary, the preliminary ruling indicated that
the judge did not consider USL's case likely to succeed, and even
suggested that there might well be no copyright in Unix 32V at all.
None the less, this tainted code does not belong in a source tree that
claims to be free.
BSDI and UCB made certain agreements with USL when the case was
settled, and I believe the FreeBSD and NetBSD teams may also have done
so, but the rest of us haven't and aren't restricted in any way by
those agreements.
I know Chris signed something, but I've no idea what it said (he
refused to tell me). I bet it said there would be no tainted code
used, though I bet USL used a different word than `tainted'.
--
This space not left unintentionally unblank. deraadt@theos.com