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.