Date: Mon, 18 Mar 2002 11:15:21 +1030 From: Greg Lehey <grog@FreeBSD.org> To: Hans Reiser <reiser@namesys.com>, hiten@uk.FreeBSD.org Cc: Terry Lambert <tlambert2@mindspring.com>, Chris Mason <mason@suse.com>, Josh MacDonald <jmacd@CS.Berkeley.EDU>, Parity Error <bootup@mail.ru>, freebsd-fs@FreeBSD.ORG, reiserfs-dev@namesys.com Subject: Re: [reiserfs-dev] Re: metadata update durability ordering/soft updates Message-ID: <20020318111521.A70252@wantadilla.lemis.com> In-Reply-To: <20020317132017.12789.qmail@web21102.mail.yahoo.com> <3C948B98.2080703@namesys.com> References: <3C910C57.71C2D823@mindspring.com> <20020315065651.02637@helen.CS.Berkeley.EDU> <3C923C91.454D7710@mindspring.com> <1562810000.1016224776@tiny> <3C928D21.404EA11D@mindspring.com> <1714680000.1016298986@tiny> <3C93BBF1.7E8801DF@mindspring.com> <3C946B57.3060403@namesys.com> <3C946B33.888F2281@mindspring.com> <3C948B98.2080703@namesys.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> > We would charge for any FreeBSD port, and the license would be a > limiting (proprietary or GPL) license. There are probably appliance > vendors and the like who would find this of interest. On Sunday, 17 March 2002 at 5:20:17 -0800, Hiten Pandya wrote: >On Sunday, 17 March 2002 at 15:27:04 +0300, Hans Reiser wrote: >> Terry Lambert wrote: >>> For FreeBSD, unless you are building a commercial product >>> based on FreeBSD and negotiate a seperate license, ReiserFS >>> under the GPL is a no-op, since you could not ship a binary >>> for FreeBSD that was capable of booting off ReiserFS, due >>> to license incompatability with the GPL. This is the same >> >> We would charge for any FreeBSD port, and the license would be a >> limiting (proprietary or GPL) license. There are probably appliance >> vendors and the like who would find this of interest. > > OK, I understand there is some big issue going on, but could I > possibly know why there would be a charge to port ReiserFS to > FreeBSD? As I have my public rights, I think it would be much > better if it was ported under a limiting license, such as the LGPL, > so ReiserFS can be used as the Boot FS for FreeBSD. I think you're misunderstanding. If I understand Hans correctly, the charge would be for the work done, not the license. It's clear enough that there's no charge for the GPL. I can certainly understand that there would be a (significant) charge associated with such a non-trivial port. Greg -- See complete headers for address and phone numbers To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-fs" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20020318111521.A70252>