Sun's use of GPL and/or debian source

[Alan DuBoff]

Daniel Jacobowitz wrote:

> There's only one question that matters, really.  Do they restrict use
> or redistribution, or in any way explicitly violate the license?

I don't know for sure. They don't restrict it, but some of the GNU tools
replace the function of SYSVR4 counterparts with added function. As an
example, SYSVR4 tar doesn't support gzip compression. You can still do it with
SYSVR4 tar by piping it through gzip, but I prefer to use gtar on Solaris.
There are some grey areas that arise, and this seems to be one of them.

> You'll notice, if you look hard enough, that Hard Hat Linux does much
> the same thing.  The differences, legally, are negligible - despite the
> fact that HHL is free and Solaris is not.  We're obviously careful to
> stay within the license, and if Sun has any sense or any lawyers, they
> are too.

Yes, but the difference being that HHL is GPL as well, Solaris is not. When I
was working on HHL for Kerbango, Don Marti and Doc Searls had come to look at
the radio, and several months later when I saw them at LinuxWorld (I think
that was the second year in San Jose) they both pointed out to me that
MontaVista was the only embedded Linux at the show that was fully GPL. I
hadn't paid too much attention to it, as I was busy coding with it<g>...but I
felt like that was a lucky to be using the one GPL compliant version of
embedded Linux. Doc knew a lot about embedded and Jim Ready, Hunter-Ready
Systems, etc...I had only met Jim a few hours before...:-/ Jim really seems to
understand the Linux movement and GPL though, from the few times I've talked
to him.

Certainly, the idea of GPL is for someone to take it and improve it, and Sun
did that to get the tools working on Solaris and provides that changes, it
just seems odd to me...

-- 

Alan DuBoff
Software Orchestration, Inc.