On May 3, 2016 8:01 PM, "Neal Gompa" <ngomp...@gmail.com> wrote: > > On Tue, May 3, 2016 at 5:17 PM, Matthew Miller <mat...@fedoraproject.org> wrote: > > On Tue, May 03, 2016 at 03:23:45PM -0400, Tom Callaway wrote: > >> Are the FreeDOS sources under a Fedora-acceptable license? > > > > Probably needs review. It's mostly GPLv2, but some of the included > > software has various other licenses. See > > <http://www.freedos.org/software/?cat=util>. I'm looking with the Fry > > meme* at a couple that say "Source code available (open)". > > > > * https://imgflip.com/s/meme/Futurama-Fry.jpg > > > > As far as I'm aware, all of the core of FreeDOS is GPLv2, but various > extra utilities may be under other licenses. Things that we can't > include are probably easy enough to remove. > > The real problem is going to be building FreeDOS from source. As far > as I know, we don't have a FOSS compiler that can produce 16-bit > binaries. There is OpenWatcom, but its license is listed as one of the > bad ones. Anyone know anybody at Sybase/SAP would could fix this? > SAP appears to be the current copyright holder for the code, as they > acquired Sybase in 2012. > >
GCC and clang can both produce 16-bit binaries using a big hack. The Linux kernel does this for some early boot code. I would be quite surprised if it would work for dosemu. I have a very very tenuous SAP contact, and I'll ask. Don't hold your breath. --Andy > > > > -- > 真実はいつも一つ！/ Always, there's only one truth! > -- > devel mailing list > devel@lists.fedoraproject.org > http://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
-- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org http://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
