Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Wed, 25 Sep 1996 14:01:14 -0600 (MDT)
From:      Nate Williams <nate@mt.sri.com>
To:        Terry Lambert <terry@lambert.org>
Cc:        wollman@lcs.mit.edu (Garrett Wollman), jhs@freebsd.org, current@freebsd.org, commercial@freebsd.org
Subject:   Re: Licensing Software
Message-ID:  <199609252001.OAA13019@rocky.mt.sri.com>
In-Reply-To: <199609251830.LAA06376@phaeton.artisoft.com>
References:  <9609251812.AA25774@halloran-eldar.lcs.mit.edu> <199609251830.LAA06376@phaeton.artisoft.com>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> [ ... lots of argument on "why it is impossible" ... ]
> 
> Surprising that SCO, Sun, and Linux (all PC OS's) all have working
> versions of Flex/LM and other license management software, what
> with it being impossible and all...

And all of them are 'poor' implementations that *require* you to call
them up if you change hostname and/or IP address.  This *isn't* a
solution IMHO.

Like you said, we're trying to do things better than the commercial
world.  I work with Flex/LM on the Sun, and it *sucks*.  Purify used to
use it, and they gave up due to consumer complaints and now use an
'honor' system which seems to work well for them.  (It also doesn't hurt
that their product works so darn well. :)




Nate



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?199609252001.OAA13019>