Date: Wed, 29 Nov 2000 12:14:10 -0700 From: Brett Glass <brett@lariat.org> To: Terry Lambert <tlambert@primenet.com> Cc: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org, freebsd-advocacy@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Here is what IBM thinks about using FreeBSD on their newer Message-ID: <4.3.2.7.2.20001129121021.049b31b0@localhost> In-Reply-To: <200011291831.LAA19970@usr08.primenet.com> References: <4.3.2.7.2.20001129111306.0498bb60@localhost>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
At 11:31 AM 11/29/2000, Terry Lambert wrote: >Or SAMBA, which we also shipped on the box? > >These were tactical, not strategic; shipping source for these >wouldn't matter, since they don't contain any intellectual >property that matters to anyone. Let people demand the code >if they want: we include a web page with links to the source >to everything they could demand, right on the box. It doesn't seem to me that this would avoid the problems you mentioned earlier. GPLed code is still infectious. [Snip] >If you think these things would need to be exposed, then >you've missed the concept of "embedded system": all InterJet >administration was and is intended to be performed via a >limited set of externalized interfaces, predominantly the >web UI. I understand embedded systems very well -- that's one of the things I do. However, as we all know, selection is a much less powerful paradigm than specification, and fixing a box or using it to its full potential often requires the power of a command line. What's more, the strategic UI code almost certainly calls on such utilities to do its work and therefore depends upon them. --Brett To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-advocacy" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?4.3.2.7.2.20001129121021.049b31b0>