Sun's use of GPL and/or debian source
Alan DuBoff <aland@SoftOrchestra.com>
Fri, 17 Aug 2001 19:35:18 -0700
Deirdre Saoirse Moen wrote:
> There is no core GPL code. It's not Linux, so the kernel itself isn't
> under the GPL, so there's no conflict with any core code. The amount
> of stuff that's GPLed is very small (gnutar, for example); the core
> stuff is mostly under BSD license.
So, the compiler is certainly GPL, and emacs ships on OSX, so both of those
were written by RMS, and believe they are GPL as such.
> What's so complex to understand?
Well, my brain is like fly-spec compared to most humans, so it takes me quite
a bit longer to have these things soak into it. Each case is different, with
use of GPL code, and now that proprietary solutions are becoming available for
Linux, I was trying to understand it. I shouldn't think out loud.
> Well, whatever, but as far as I'm concerned, the *important* stuff is
> open source. I can do all the important stuff I need with open source
> tools, so I don't worry about the "pretty layer."
Yeah, that's cool also, I haven't looked at the release and was only running
the BETA. The Classic support was pretty bad on the BETA of OSX. Ironically, I
then installed Debian PPC and it worked out better for my purposes. If there
were more OSX applications available, Mac OSX would have been more useful to
me. <sound of white flag waving>
Software Orchestration, Inc.