From: nate@cs.montana.edu (Nate Williams) Subject: Re: Summary of Linux vs. 386BSD vs. Commercial Unixes Date: Sun, 18 Apr 1993 18:05:07 GMT
In article <NOP.93Apr17221444@theory.mankato.msus.edu> nop@theory.cs.mankato.msus.edu writes:
>
>In article <1993Apr17.205715.11278@coe.montana.edu> nate@cs.montana.edu (Nate Williams) writes:
> No, my purpose is to make 386BSD completely re-distrubutable, with NO
> strings attached. That means Sun, DEC, HP, Ren and Stimpy, or whoever
> can take this code and sell a binary copy of it. The GPL does not allow
> this.
>
>You and I, and your list of luminaries, can sell binary copies of
>GPL'd code. What you can't do is sell 'em without source availability.
Agreed.
>
> The original BSD copyright has been this way, but unfortunately a group of
> people take the code, fix the code, and then place restrictions on it.
>
>How is this worse than, say, DEC fixing the code and not releasing
>source at all?
DEC never claimed to be 'morally superior', and convince the world that the
only way to write code was to do it DEC's way.
Nate
-- osynw@terra.oscs.montana.edu | Still trying to find a good reason for nate@cs.montana.edu | these 'computer' things. Personally, work #: (406) 994-4836 | I don't think they'll catch on - home #: (406) 586-0579 | Don Hammerstrom