SPONSORED LINKS
Warning - this is a digression on a digression, and not meant to fuel any flames. On Wed, 18 Oct 1995, Don Whiteside wrote: > [Question about relative merits of free unices, and some comments about > legal and usage restrictions...] > > The 4.4-Lite code is very stable, and being maintained. People interested > should go look at http://www.freebsd.org and read the 'about' and > 'history' bits. It is also resellable (if you choose to build upon it to > resistribute), _unlike_ the Linux stuff which is under the GPL. If the linux GPL is like the GNU General Public License, then that is neither a correct nor fair representation of it, in a fundamental way. As i understand it, the GPL allows any amount of resale and redistribution of the code to which it is applied, but with one very specific restriction - source code must be provided along with executables. Am i mistaken - does the Linux version actually prohibit resale? I don't mean to make any claims about the merits or burdens of this policy - that is a big bag of worms, and probably not an ideal topic for this mailing list. However, i don't want people who aren't acquainted with the situation to get the wrong impression. ken manheimer klm@cnri.reston.va.us (703) 620-8990 x259 Corporation for National Research Initiatives 1895 Preston White Drive, Suite 100 Reston, VA 22091