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!news.wildstar.net!news.ececs.uc.edu!newsrelay.netins.net!newsfeed.dacom.co.kr!usenet.kornet.nm.kr!howland.erols.net!vixen.cso.uiuc.edu!news.sprintlink.net!news-peer.sprintlink.net!nwnews.wa.com!brokaw.wa.com!dogbert.sitewerks.com!eric
From: Eric Hoeltzel <eric@dogbert.sitewerks.com>
Newsgroups: comp.os.linux.misc,comp.os.linux.networking,comp.os.linux.setup,comp.unix.bsd.misc,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.os.os2.advocacy
Subject: Re: Linux vs whatever
Date: Thu, 30 Jan 1997 11:45:41 -0800
Organization: Northwest Nexus Inc.
Lines: 34
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.3.93.970130114010.3513D-100000@dogbert.sitewerks.com>
References: <32DFFEAB.7704@usa.net> <32ED1866.34F02393@indiana.edu> <5cl66d$l52@web.nmti.com> <32EE3C3C.5534B736@indiana.edu> <5clhf9$l60@web.nmti.com> <32EE7EC9.38809021@indiana.edu> <32EE8FCE.2781E494@freebsd.org> <5cne9r$3i0@camel0.mindspring.com>
NNTP-Posting-Host: dogbert.sitewerks.com
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
To: David LeBlanc <dleblanc@mindspring.com>
In-Reply-To: <5cne9r$3i0@camel0.mindspring.com>
Xref: euryale.cc.adfa.oz.au comp.os.linux.misc:153717 comp.os.linux.networking:65831 comp.os.linux.setup:93475 comp.unix.bsd.misc:1976 comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy:50720 comp.os.os2.advocacy:263008
On Wed, 29 Jan 1997, David LeBlanc wrote:
> "John S. Dyson" <dyson@freebsd.org> wrote:
>
> >I always suggest passing the GPL by an knowlegeable lawyer who
> >understands the industry and the ramifications of the license.
> >If GPL is okay for your circumstance, then it is okay (cant
> >believe that I said that :-)). Using GPL software "by default"
> >as "free" softare might cause some initially unforseen problems.
>
> I have to agree 100% with this one. The product I've been working on
> has had some real fits over GPL code. However, one thing I haven't
> seen mentioned is that there is also a library license. You can
> compile up a library and link with it without the rest of your app
> falling under the GLL. If you modified the library, then you'd need
> to redistribute that.
>
> Unfortunately, what it boils down to in many, many cases is that all
> this "free" software on the net simply cannot be used in a commercial
^^^^
> product at all.
Good, good, good! I don't ever remember a commercial software
company ever doing me any favors other than taking my money
because I had no alternative. Only within the last couple of
years have I been able to shed my dependance upon commercial
software. I am very glad that "free" software makes life hard
on commercial developers.
Eric