Joern Clausen (joern@TechFak.Uni-Bielefeld.DE) wrote:
> > The source license is not that expensive for universities.  I work for
> > the university, and do have access to the source code, but only for
> > 1.2 ... which will _not_ compile under R6 (and work correctly).  
> > 
> > I'm waiting for the uni. to get the 2.x source, and then I'll start
> > working on it....
> 
> We have the sources for 2.0, but what it's worth? They are licensed
> to our faculty, and I guess (I haven't seen the legal blurb of the OSF
> yet) it is not allowed to give away *anything* of them. This would of
> course include the sources, but also shared libraries for any architecture,
> include-files, probably not even statically linked binaries (this would
> make the status of the Mosaic in X11R6.04Jan95-NotXConsortium very
> questionable).
> 
> Right now I can't find anything on this topic in the source tree, and
> the paperized documentation is not available for me at the moment, but
> maybe someone can enlighten me (and others) in this question.

Someone told me I can use the license for Motif 1.2 at our department to
compile Motif at home, but I'm not allowed to distribute statically linked
binaries.

We also have Motif 2.0, but its license doesn't even allow me to use it at home
(that's what people told me).

Greetings,

						Geert

--
Geert Uytterhoeven                     Geert.Uytterhoeven@cs.kuleuven.ac.be
Wavelets, Linux/68k on Amiga,...       http://www.cs.kuleuven.ac.be/~geert/
Department of Computer Science -- Katholieke Universiteit Leuven -- Belgium