From owner-freebsd-arch@FreeBSD.ORG Fri Feb 24 20:30:09 2006 Return-Path: X-Original-To: arch@freebsd.org Delivered-To: freebsd-arch@FreeBSD.ORG Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 37D5C16A423 for ; Fri, 24 Feb 2006 20:30:09 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from gilbert.fernandes@spamcop.net) Received: from mailgate.cesmail.net (mailgate.cesmail.net [216.154.195.36]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with SMTP id E220E43D45 for ; Fri, 24 Feb 2006 20:30:07 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from gilbert.fernandes@spamcop.net) Received: (qmail 10680 invoked from network); 24 Feb 2006 20:30:07 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO delta.cesmail.net) (192.168.1.30) by mailgate.cesmail.net with SMTP; 24 Feb 2006 20:30:07 -0000 Received: (qmail 3917 invoked by uid 99); 24 Feb 2006 20:30:07 -0000 Received: from i02v-87-89-157-8.d4.club-internet.fr (i02v-87-89-157-8.d4.club-internet.fr [87.89.157.8]) by webmail.spamcop.net (Horde) with HTTP for ; Fri, 24 Feb 2006 21:30:07 +0100 Message-ID: <20060224213007.6x6dqzo4gw0sw0cg@webmail.spamcop.net> Date: Fri, 24 Feb 2006 21:30:07 +0100 From: Gilbert Fernandes To: Max Khon References: <12424860.1139921265521.JavaMail.root@vms169.mailsrvcs.net> <20060224193521.GA24121@samodelkin.net> In-Reply-To: <20060224193521.GA24121@samodelkin.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit User-Agent: Internet Messaging Program (IMP) 4.0-cvs Cc: arch@freebsd.org, babkin@users.sf.net Subject: [off-topic] NTFS, Apple and GPL vs LGPL (Was : NTFS write support) X-BeenThere: freebsd-arch@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussion related to FreeBSD architecture List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 24 Feb 2006 20:30:09 -0000 > I'm pretty sure that Microsoft makes the technical details > available for NTFS, either from their website or from one of their > DDKs. There is a Linux NTFS project at linux-ntfs.org This is mainly off-topic but while reading a few days ago an article on Slashdot called " Will MacIntel Kill Apple Open Source Efforts?", I read an interesting comment about Apple and that NTFS Linux project : ----8>----8>----8>----8>----8>----8>----8> Last July, Apple asked [sourceforge.net] {http://linux-ntfs.org/} Anton Altaparmakov, lead developer of the Linux-NTFS [linux-ntfs.org] project, to dual license the Linux-NTFS driver under the APL so that the Intel version of OS X can read/write files on Windows partitions (presumably for dual-boot computers). The problem pointed out by other Linux-NTFS developers is that the APL is not GPL compatible [gnu.org], and any changes made by Apple to the driver will be unusable in Linux. As one person put it: This would open up a one-way street: towards OS X and away from GNU/Linux and any other OS based on the GPL. Not to mention the Konqueror / Safari fiasco {http://apple.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=05/06/07/134222} where Apple complied to the terms of the LGPL by the skin of their teeth, making it impossible [kdedevelopers.org] for open source developers to port changes upstream. In November, Apple has again tried to hijack Linux-NTFS code, this time by suggesting {http://sourceforge.net/mailarchive/message.php?msg_id=13769046} that it be licensed under the LGPL. This was promptly rejected by one main developer, who threatened lawsuits. ----8>----8>----8>----8>----8>----8>----8> It is thus highly probable that Apple would like to see a BSD-based implementation of NTFS. They asked twice the GPL-based project to adopt a dual-licence so they (Apple) would be able to integrate this into MacOS X. Perhaps Apple would agree to give some support for the BSD-licence based work ? -- unzip ; strip ; touch ; grep ; find ; finger ; mount ; fsck ; more ; yes ; fsck ; umount ; sleep