From owner-freebsd-hackers Tue Jan 29 15:39: 2 2002 Delivered-To: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org Received: from chiark.greenend.org.uk (chiark.greenend.org.uk [212.22.195.2]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E39DC37B433 for ; Tue, 29 Jan 2002 15:38:33 -0800 (PST) Received: from fanf by chiark.greenend.org.uk with local (Exim 3.12 #2) id 16Vhpd-0000b5-00 (Debian); Tue, 29 Jan 2002 23:38:29 +0000 Date: Tue, 29 Jan 2002 23:38:29 +0000 From: Tony Finch To: Greg Lehey Cc: Nate Williams , Tony Finch , Dominic Marks , hackers@FreeBSD.ORG, Dion Johnson Subject: Re: FreeBSD-1.X public cvs? Message-ID: <20020129233829.A2112@chiark.greenend.org.uk> References: <20020130100520.E54159@wantadilla.lemis.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii User-Agent: Mutt/1.0.1i In-Reply-To: <20020130100520.E54159@wantadilla.lemis.com>; from grog@lemis.com on Wed, Jan 30, 2002 at 10:05:20AM +1030 Sender: owner-freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk List-ID: List-Archive: (Web Archive) List-Help: (List Instructions) List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG On Wed, Jan 30, 2002 at 10:05:20AM +1030, Greg Lehey wrote: > Nate Williams wrote: > > > > Thanks. I'm going to wait and see what happens w/regards to the > > talking heads on this, and if the consensus is that it's legal to > > post, I'll upload the bits to freefall. > > It's legal. Here's the original message. I'm also copying Dion > Johnson. Dion, as I'm sure you're aware, we took the FreeBSD 1.x > sources offline because they were "tainted" with AT&T code. Now that > 32V is free, there should be no further problem releasing them, right? What about which concerns the Berkeley patches to the AT&T code? Tony. To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message