[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: L4-hurd discuss

From: Benno
Subject: Re: L4-hurd discuss
Date: Sat, 25 Jun 2005 10:46:44 +1000
User-agent: Mutt/1.5.6+20040907i

On Fri Jun 24, 2005 at 17:15:59 -0700, David Leimbach wrote:
>On Jun 24, 2005, at 4:07 PM, Benno wrote:
>>On Sat Jun 25, 2005 at 03:38:08 +0800, Neil Santos wrote:
>>>On 20:45 23/06/05, Matthew Dempsky wrote:
>>>>>Isn't this just a bit of an understatement?  UIM, more often  
>>>>>than not,
>>>>>Linus and RMS aren't even looking in the same general direction.
>>>>Fine, it's irrelevant either way though.
>>>It is, isn't it?
>>>>>As for OpenSolaris, well...  If its source would
>>>>>be made available using a free versioning system, stayed away from
>>>>>including proprietary hardware drivers, and was licensed under  
>>>>>any of
>>>>>the licenses the FSF considers free, then it *will* fit the  
>>>>>spirit of
>>>>>the FSF's goals better than Linux.
>>>>That's a big if.  Wouldn't it be better to just use a BSD kernel?
>>>>Debian has demonstrated this is feasible.
>>>As you've noticed, it *is* feasible; it has proven to be feasible,
>>>because efforts at coming up with a GNU/FreeBSD system is already  
>>>under way.  A GNU/Linux system is also feasible; the fact that
>>>hundreds of thousands, if not millions, of individuals and groups
>>>already use a derivative of the base GNU/Linux system is more than
>>>enough proof.
>>>Personally, I don't want a GNU/*BSD system, or, at least, I'd still
>>>like a purely GNU system.  It's simple enough, really: I'm  
>>>selfish.  I
>>>don't want proprietary software developers to keep on doing what they
>>>have for decades: taking BSD-licensed software and using it to  
>>>their own.  I only want to share with those who'll share with me, as
>>Umm, you do realise that L4::Pistachio is made available to you under
>>a BSD-style license not the GPL right?
>Nothing and no one is stopping anyone from doing a GPL'd L4  
>though if they choose.

Absolutely. It just seems odd to me that people are so against using a BSD
licensed monolithic kernel, but are perferectly happy using a BSD licensed
microkernel. I thought some people on the list might not have realised the
license under which Pistachio was released.

>Plus GNU Hurd has always been about the servers themselves IIRC, not the
>microkernel or what-have-you it runs on.

Yeah sure. I guess the people here are interested in cotributing to HURD itself,
not u-kernel, so it doesn't really matter *what* the u-kernel is licensed under.

>Just out of curiosity, is this the L4 Darwin Benno?




reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]