In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> "Brian F.
Feldman" writes:
: There
: is simply no reason to assume that anything under a gnu directory is GPLd,
: or that anything GPLd is going to be under a gnu directory (which it's not.)
I'm afraid there is. It has been stated many times in the past that
all GPL'd software resides under gnu. This is true in the big
(/usr/src/gnu) and in the small (src/sys/gnu). The gnu directory name
is magic in the minds of many people, and has been for a long time in
the FreeBSD project. While much of the actual software lives in
/usr/contrib, those parts that are under GPL are still built in
gnu/.... It is confusing, despite your assertions to the contrary.
That's just how FreeBSD has operated for as long as I can recall,
certainly back to the 1.0 time frame.
glibc or fsf do not carry these long term connocations. To some they
might connote gpl'd code, but they are better choices for naming in
the libcompat tree since it doesn't have the traditionally overloaded
"gnu" term plus tell what the code is compatible with (which is how
the directories in libcompat work.
Contrib doesn't have a separate gnu dir, but that is irrelevant.
Nothing is built in the contrib tree. It is all built in usr.bin or
usr.sbin or gnu/usr.bin, etc. All the GPL'd parts of the contrib tree
are built under gnu/... (it is a bug if they are not). Using it to
support a gnu directory would likely have negative impact on the
strength of your argument.
Warner
To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message
