From owner-freebsd-chat Sat Nov 18 17:47:47 2000 Delivered-To: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org Received: from lariat.org (lariat.org [12.23.109.2]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5665137B479 for ; Sat, 18 Nov 2000 17:47:44 -0800 (PST) Received: from mustang.lariat.org (IDENT:ppp0.lariat.org@lariat.org [12.23.109.2]) by lariat.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id SAA20950; Sat, 18 Nov 2000 18:47:27 -0700 (MST) Message-Id: <4.3.2.7.2.20001118184345.045f1d90@localhost> X-Sender: brett@localhost X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 4.3.2 Date: Sat, 18 Nov 2000 18:47:22 -0700 To: Brad Knowles From: Brett Glass Subject: Re: GPL rant number 31391 (was: Jordan Hubbard on Darwin) Cc: chat@FreeBSD.ORG In-Reply-To: References: <20001119111646.C5877@echunga.lemis.com> <4.3.2.7.2.20001118142924.00cb6850@localhost> <20001119111646.C5877@echunga.lemis.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Sender: owner-freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.org At 06:11 PM 11/18/2000, Brad Knowles wrote: > I have to agree as well. While the GPL folks may be anti-BSD, the BSD folks don't necessarily have to be anti-GPL. While I don't like their license, I feel no restraint whatsoever against using good software that I like, such as bash. > > I really don't see why you've got your panties in such a twist. It has to do with the big picture. The BSD community should not be dependent upon a group that seeks to snuff it out. It needs its own shells, its own compilers, its own tools. Both for its own sake and for the sake of users who would otherwise be locked into the FSF's software. --Brett To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-chat" in the body of the message