Re: LGPL vs. BSD

[Hubert Feyrer <hubertf%gmx.de@localhost>]

In article 
<3399baee0802140952md555387vf1c9f14e99ed797e%mail.gmail.com@localhost> you 
wrote:
> Do you have some LGPL code into your codebase? [not including the
> software in pkgsrc]

NetBSD has a bunch of GPL'd software (I don't know if LGPL or GPL, but i 
guess mostly the latter), see src/gnu/ on http://cvsweb.netbsd.org/


> If yes, are you happy with it? or do you have plans to rewrite it
> under BSD license?

I'm not aware of any pressing needs for rewriting of any of the existing 
pieces, though the GPL "problem" came up the other day when we talked 
about LVM - in theory one could use a (BSD-licensed) driver with the Linux 
LVM software, but it would be hard to package that into a product due to 
the GPL.


> If I want to write some NetBSD specific code [userland, but tied to
> your OS], do you HEAVILY suggest me to provide it under the 4 clause
> BSD license?

That's hard to tell without the details on your software.

FWIW, NetBSD will move away from 4 clauses soonish, towards 2-3 clauses (I 
forgot the details). Maybe hat helps a bit.

The central question if GPL code is "acceptable" is how critical your code 
will be for the average user, and what will break if it can't be shipped. 
E.g. on embedded devices, no C compiler is acceptable. Other thincs like 
the kernel can't be left out, and as such there's a "no GPL in the kernel" 
rule in NetBSD.


 - Hubert