Subject: Re: sendmail licensing again
To: NetBSD-current Discussion List <firstname.lastname@example.org>
From: Greg A. Woods <email@example.com>
Date: 12/11/1998 12:00:20
[ On Fri, December 11, 1998 at 08:45:47 (-0500), Mason Loring Bliss wrote: ]
> Subject: Re: sendmail licensing again
> > And you've had to turn NetBSD into a commercially distributed system how
> > many times?
> Out of curiosity, how many times *has* this been done? That aspect of our
> project is my least favourite, and I'd love to know just how necessary it
> (This will sound crazed to everyone, I'm sure, but I'd love to see the
> entirety of NetBSD GPLed, personally. Flames are unnecessary - I'm aware
> of why that's not now the case, and why it never will be the case.)
I don't know exactly how much it qualifies, but yes, I've commercially
distributed NetBSD, but always as if the entire thing were covered by
the FSF GNU GPL -- I.e. full kernel source is shipped on the machine,
and the rest of the source is made available on request (it's on our FTP
So, "me too!" -- I'd not care a hoot if all of NetBSD were GPLed.
However it doesn't really matter to me one way or another. I just think
the segregation of "foreign" code in the tree is a *bad*, *Evil*, thing.
Why not segregate the GPLed binaries too!?!?!?!?!? How's an end user to
know what they stand a chance of fixing otherwise?????
Greg A. Woods
+1 416 218-0098 VE3TCP <firstname.lastname@example.org> <robohack!woods>
Planix, Inc. <email@example.com>; Secrets of the Weird <firstname.lastname@example.org>