"Albert D. Cahalan" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > >> NetBSD has also a not so free sourcecode (I see it as package not > >> only the Kernel). Some parts are not published under GPL (like > >> Linux) but under the BSD License which restricts developers and > >> users.
> > That's not correct. The BSD license is more liberal than the GPL, > Nope. The original BSD license places restrictions on how you may > advertize BSD-based products. (must mention UC Berkeley) While the > university has dropped this requirement, many people cloned the > license with their own name in place of UC Berkeley. Thus you may > not advertize NetBSD without including a huge list of contributers. I guess it depends on your version of 'liberal'. Despite that restriction, you can do more with the BSD code than with GPL code. Who cares about the details though, I hate licensing discussions - I just wanted to correct a rather gross error on the part of the original poster. Ciao, -- David N. Welton Consulting: http://www.dedasys.com/ Free Software: http://people.debian.org/~davidw/ Apache Tcl: http://tcl.apache.org/ Personal: http://www.efn.org/~davidw/
