Date: Mon, 21 Sep 1998 22:42:22 +0000 (GMT) From: Terry Lambert <tlambert@primenet.com> To: eivind@yes.no (Eivind Eklund) Cc: mike@smith.net.au, pfgiffun@bachue.usc.unal.edu.co, hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: More on the Intel-UNIX standard Message-ID: <199809212242.PAA19688@usr04.primenet.com> In-Reply-To: <19980921133218.15796@follo.net> from "Eivind Eklund" at Sep 21, 98 01:32:18 pm
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> > There's no need for the reference implementation to be GPL-contaminated > > - it can be shipped as patches to the Linux kernel rather than > > integrated with it, and those patches need not be GPL'ed. > > I don't think this is correct. I believe the patches would count as a > derived work, and thus would be covered by the GPL. :-( They would. But you could seperate the patches from the implementation. The main problem is that the contribution of changes would need to be back to the UDI source base, rather than to Linux, to be able to facilitate any OS other than Linux, and to keep the standard from fragmenting. It also seems to me that Linux will be in the same boat as FreeBSD, in that it will have to convince vendors to recompile under Linux, since it is a source-level standard, and Adaptec is not going to release their source code to them any more than to us. FWIW: There is not mention of Linux that I have been able to find on the UDI WWW pages. I have sent email off to the contacts concerning the contents of the directory: ftp://ftp.cup.hp.com/pub/hp_stds/udi/pub_include/ And the licensing policy for the files on that site. I expect a response in the near future (i.e., let's not all mail-bomb them). Terry Lambert terry@lambert.org --- Any opinions in this posting are my own and not those of my present or previous employers. To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?199809212242.PAA19688>