John Nemeth wrote:
>      Yeah, that does go against the spirit of open source.

I think the QNX just use their general blurb in there and did not realize
it would cause any problem with IPFilter if integrated. Someone
(possibly Darren?) should just talk with them to ask for more
favourable licence, preferably BSD-like without clause 3 :)

>      BTW, anybody know what the final result of that spat last year
> over the IPFiler licence is?  Since IPFilter is still part of NetBSD, I
> assume that something was worked out.

It's also part of FreeBSD.

Quote from IPFILTER.LICENCE:
"""
Redistribution and use, with or without modification, in source and binary
forms, are permitted provided that this notice is preserved in its entirety
and due credit is given to the original author and the contributors.
"""

i.e. there is no licence problem at all.

The details of particular debates is accessible on various inet
archives. I'm _very_ happy the issue has settled already.

Jaromir
-- 
Jaromir Dolecek <jdolecek@NetBSD.org> http://www.NetBSD.org/Ports/i386/ps2.html
-=- We should be mindful of the potential goal, but as the tantric    -=-
-=- Buddhist masters say, ``You may notice during meditation that you -=-
-=- sometimes levitate or glow.   Do not let this distract you.''     -=-