Subject: Re: Licensing questions for misc djb and djb-related packages
To: None <email@example.com>
From: Kevin Sindhu <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Date: 09/02/2001 18:25:57
On Mon, Sep 03, 2001 at 10:03:33AM +0900, email@example.com penned:
> From: firstname.lastname@example.org
> Subject: Re: Licensing questions for misc djb and djb-related packages
> Date: Mon, 03 Sep 2001 01:18:30 +0900
> > does this changelog message have anything to do with netbsd packages
> > for these djb-origin code?
> > http://www.openbsd.org/cgi-bin/cvsweb/ports/net/djbdns/Attic/Makefile
> > (revision 1.14, removal)
> Good question.
> Below are pointers to what I was able to find concerning this:
> My initial impression is that as long as you don't distribute modified
> binaries or source, you're fine. So my guess is that making NetBSD
> packages (non-binary) shouldn't be a problem.
This has been a major cause of problems between obsd/DJB. How are you
packaging this? Where does it go(dir)? Have you asked DJB for his
"explict" permission? What chances/changes would you need if you ever
modified/updated this code? And would this need talking to DJB time
I'd say this is more a hassle than its worth. Plus, how hard is it for
anyone to compile and install them anyway? Do you really wanna
follow/start a holy war between NetBSD/DJB when(if) such problems ever
My 2 cents..
Life is too important to take seriously.
-- Corky Siegel