Subject: Re: sendmail licensing again
To: NetBSD-current Discussion List <email@example.com>
From: Todd Vierling <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Date: 12/11/1998 12:50:05
On Fri, 11 Dec 1998, Greg A. Woods wrote:
: 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?????
You're saying the same *overly assuming* statement again.
You don't have to segregate GPL binaries. You can distribute them with a
binary distribution as long as you provide a reasonable, free way of
obtaining their source code. You must also not claim a fee for only the
GPL-ed executables as part of the aggregate work, but you may charge a fee
for the aggregate work.
Since a commercial distributor must have a way to distribute the GPL-ed
source, we put it under gnu/ to make this an easy task for maintainers and
Is that so difficult to deal with, much less understand?
-- Todd Vierling (Personal email@example.com; Bus. firstname.lastname@example.org)