On Tue, Aug 23, 2011 at 06:17:53PM +0200, Tomas Bodzar wrote: > Hi all, > > as some of you maybe know there's new player on OS market called > http://smartos.org . What's starting to be interesting is their "port" > of KVM to Solaris code base which is used as a kernel module. > > Bryan Cantrill didn't talk much about licenses in his paper > http://www.linux-kvm.org/wiki/images/7/71/2011-forum-porting-to-smartos.pdf > No matter how much interesting it sounds, the question on licensing > was addressed vaguely (if at all) during the talk. In a private chat > later, Bryan mentioned there's no violation at all, but here you can > find a little more discussion https://lwn.net/Articles/455008/ > > In NetBSD is eg. dtrace/zfs made as module. The question now is if > those ports are CDDL, GPL or BSD licensed. Probably there was not > similar case at court yet. > > As I know CDDL parts are (for example as modules) in FreeBSD and > NetBSD and there were couple of threads on misc@ about porting > zfs/dtrace to OpenBSD as well. > > OpenBSD is really clear about its policy, but do you think that it's > really possible to port stuff this way and made it available as > module without need for change of license or worrying about shark > suits?
Sure you can make a port. You can have all kinds of unfree things in packages. So go for it. > > Thx > > PS: No flame at all. I just think that this situation can be > interesting regarding future because of mixing licenses in some of > systems which are not so strict about license policy Only for the base OS. Packages can have all kinds of crazy licenses.
