On Mon, 25 Dec 2000, Warner Losh wrote: > Date: Mon, 25 Dec 2000 11:32:03 -0700 > From: Warner Losh <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: Alex Belits <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Re: FreeBSD vs Linux, Solaris, and NT > > In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Alex >Belits writes: > : Your attorneys are stupid. > > Are they now? The GPL was designed to force companies to release > sources. The FSF put a lot of time and effort into it so that they > could force people to give back mods to gcc and the like. ...but RMS' ones are smart, so GPL/LGPL define as strrictly as possible in a vague world of software, what is "infected" by it and what is not. -- Alex To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message
- Re: FreeBSD vs Linux, Solaris, and NT Matt Dillon
- RE: FreeBSD vs. Linux, Solaris, and NT SteveB
- Re: FreeBSD vs. Linux, Solaris, and NT Warner Losh
- RE: FreeBSD vs. Linux, Solaris, and NT Marco van de Voort
- Re: FreeBSD vs. Linux, Solaris, and NT Neil Blakey-Milner
- RE: FreeBSD vs. Linux, Solaris, and NT mouss
- Re: FreeBSD vs Linux, Solaris, and NT Warner Losh
- Re: FreeBSD vs Linux, Solaris, and NT Alex Belits
- Re: FreeBSD vs Linux, Solaris, and NT Warner Losh
- Re: licenses (no long Re: FreeBSD vs Linux... Wes Peters
- Re: FreeBSD vs Linux, Solaris, and NT Alex Belits
- Re: FreeBSD vs Linux, Solaris, and NT Wes Peters
- Re: FreeBSD vs Linux, Solaris, and NT Warner Losh
- Re: FreeBSD vs Linux, Solaris, and NT Matt Dillon
- Re: FreeBSD vs Linux, Solaris, and NT Wes Peters
- Re: FreeBSD vs Linux, Solaris, and NT Julian Stacey [EMAIL PROTECTED]
- Re: FreeBSD vs Linux, Solaris, and NT Drew Eckhardt
- RE: FreeBSD vs Linux, Solaris, and NT SteveB
- Re: FreeBSD vs Linux, Solaris, and NT Jeremiah Gowdy
- RE: FreeBSD vs Linux, Solaris, and NT SteveB
- Re: FreeBSD vs Linux, Solaris, and NT Marco van de Voort