Date: 2008-08-18 01:19 pm (UTC)
From a recent mailing list thread "When gcc43 is expected to be in base?":

[...]
Nor is there anything wrong with the GPLv3 license-- it's well-crafted
and handles certain technical issues resulting from varied legal
systems quite well compared to most other licenses (eg, clause 17 for
many European jurisdictions which do not permit one to completely
disclaim liability), *provided* one is working on completely open
systems.

However, anyone who needs to do things with cryptography and signing
is going to find GPLv3 clauses 3 and 6 unworkable. FreeBSD (and
NetBSD, OpenBSD, etc) are attractive for people building embedded
systems because they are (mostly) not GPL(v2)-encumbered, and adopting
GPLv3 code would make that problem worse.


Also http://it.toolbox.com/blogs/bsd-guru/the-freebsd-foundation-on-gpl3-18770 and http://www.freebsd.org/doc/en/articles/bsdl-gpl/article.html

It's a shame so many people are switching to GPLv3 because it's going to make commercial software development harder. I know one of the things I like about VxWorks is that it has many BSD commands - after being told many times by colleagues that "VxWorks isn't UNIX" (when I complained that "ls" didn't work) I found they'd basically lifted the FreeBSD 6 network stack and dumped it into their product. Finding that was quite wonderful.
If you don't have an account you can create one now.
HTML doesn't work in the subject.
More info about formatting

If you are unable to use this captcha for any reason, please contact us by email at support@dreamwidth.org

.

Profile

spudtater: (Default)
spudtater

Most Popular Tags

Powered by Dreamwidth Studios

Style Credit

Expand Cut Tags

No cut tags