From owner-freebsd-fs Mon Mar 18 20:46:59 2002 Delivered-To: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org Received: from thebsh.namesys.com (thebsh.namesys.com [212.16.7.65]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 978EE37B41A for ; Mon, 18 Mar 2002 20:46:35 -0800 (PST) Received: (qmail 22687 invoked from network); 19 Mar 2002 04:46:33 -0000 Received: from backtop.namesys.com (HELO namesys.com) (212.16.7.71) by thebsh.namesys.com with SMTP; 19 Mar 2002 04:46:33 -0000 Message-ID: <3C96D04B.6060201@namesys.com> Date: Tue, 19 Mar 2002 08:44:43 +0300 From: Hans Reiser User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:0.9.9) Gecko/20020310 X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: hiten@uk.FreeBSD.org Cc: Greg Lehey , Chris Mason , Josh MacDonald , Parity Error , freebsd-fs@FreeBSD.org, reiserfs-dev@namesys.com Subject: Re: [reiserfs-dev] Re: metadata update durability ordering/soft updates References: <20020318195817.26106.qmail@web21105.mail.yahoo.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-freebsd-fs@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk List-ID: List-Archive: (Web Archive) List-Help: (List Instructions) List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: X-Loop: FreeBSD.org Hiten Pandya wrote: >--- Hans Reiser wrote: > >>Hiten Pandya wrote: >>I actually don't understand the remark about needing to pay me >>royalties. If you leave the GPL on the code, and don't violate the GPL >>by integrating it with non-GPL compatible code, you don't need to pay >>me. You can probably talk me into granting waivers on trivially >>incompatible with the GPL licenses. Where you need to pay me is when >>you want someone (yourself or MS or anyone....) to be able to add to >>BDS+ReiserFS without making their additions free. >> > >I think I get your point (after all this time 8-)). If someone ports >ReiserFS >to FreeBSD, there will be no fee; but if someone makes additions to ReiserFS, >than they have to pay you for logical business reasons, am I right? > If they make non-free additions to reiserfs, or to a kernel that reiserfs is a part of. > > >Apart from that, there would be no issue in porting ReiserFS to FreeBSD. One >more question, if the booting part of ReiserFS was re-written in the BSD >License, would there be any issues still existing? :-) > >Also, I think I also made a clear fact of the Ext2FS code in FreeBSD. How >do you think ReiserFS would do in similar situations?, which type of license >does SuSE use? :) > What license is there on that ext2fs code in FreeBSD, is it GPL or other? > > >[ PS. I am asking the above question in manner which would be clear to >everyone, so this can be archived and refered to in the future, if these >kinds of question arise again. Thanks ] > >Regards, > > -- Hiten > >__________________________________________________ >Do You Yahoo!? >Yahoo! Sports - live college hoops coverage >http://sports.yahoo.com/ > > To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-fs" in the body of the message