Date: Wed, 10 May 95 10:54:20 MDT From: terry@cs.weber.edu (Terry Lambert) To: davidg@Root.COM Cc: gibbs@estienne.CS.Berkeley.EDU, freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: A question of downloading device drivers Message-ID: <9505101654.AA25785@cs.weber.edu> In-Reply-To: <199505100229.TAA05636@corbin.Root.COM> from "David Greenman" at May 9, 95 07:29:55 pm
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> >The developer. Note I did *not* say "a bad choice"... I render no > >judgment other than to note that the static inclusion of that code > >in binary form puts kernels distributed with it under obligation > >to the GPL as long as it remains GPL'ed code. For the CDROM > >distribution, this isn't a problem, but FTP code could be. > > The code is not GPL'd. The original author of the sequencer code has > released it under a Berkeley-style copyright. Well, there went that argument. 8-). How about replacing it with the argument that the code can't be upgraded without rebuilding the kernel? Terry Lambert terry@cs.weber.edu --- Any opinions in this posting are my own and not those of my present or previous employers.
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?9505101654.AA25785>