On Thu, 2003-11-20 at 08:34, Rod Taylor wrote:
> > I think maybe the simplest thing is for me to prepare a patch that rips
> > that code out and replaces it with a (slightly simpler - less umask
> > hacking required, I think) piece of code that I will write.
>
> The FreeBSD folks sorted it out f
Hello,
My understanding is that they use the BSD stack (at least as the
basis) for TCP/IP. Windows that is.
J
Marc G. Fournier wrote:
On Thu, 20 Nov 2003, Joshua D. Drake wrote:
Based on the below wouldn't they also have to go after Microsoft?
Depends ... does MicroSoft use BSD TCP/I
--On Thursday, November 20, 2003 16:00:44 -0400 "Marc G. Fournier"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On Thu, 20 Nov 2003, Joshua D. Drake wrote:
Based on the below wouldn't they also have to go after Microsoft?
Depends ... does MicroSoft use BSD TCP/IP, or did they write their own? I
know that Linux
Marc G. Fournier wrote:
On Thu, 20 Nov 2003, Joshua D. Drake wrote:
Based on the below wouldn't they also have to go after Microsoft?
Depends ... does MicroSoft use BSD TCP/IP, or did they write their own? I
know that Linux is not using BSD TCP/IP (or, at least, they didn't in
their firs
On Thu, 20 Nov 2003, Joshua D. Drake wrote:
> Based on the below wouldn't they also have to go after Microsoft?
Depends ... does MicroSoft use BSD TCP/IP, or did they write their own? I
know that Linux is not using BSD TCP/IP (or, at least, they didn't in
their first 3 incarnations of the stack)
Based on the below wouldn't they also have to go after Microsoft?
Marc G. Fournier wrote:
On Thu, 20 Nov 2003, Andrew Dunstan wrote:
Of course, now that SCO is claiming ownership of BSD code .
Interesting thread that ... last I read on the FreeBSD lists was
speculation that they wou
On Thu, 20 Nov 2003, Andrew Dunstan wrote:
> Of course, now that SCO is claiming ownership of BSD code .
>
Interesting thread that ... last I read on the FreeBSD lists was
speculation that they would be going after ppl like Cisco (re: TCP/IP
Networking Code) since there really is nobody else
Rod Taylor wrote:
> > I think maybe the simplest thing is for me to prepare a patch that rips
> > that code out and replaces it with a (slightly simpler - less umask
> > hacking required, I think) piece of code that I will write.
>
> The FreeBSD folks sorted it out for us.
>
> Everyones names s
Rod Taylor wrote:
I think maybe the simplest thing is for me to prepare a patch that rips
that code out and replaces it with a (slightly simpler - less umask
hacking required, I think) piece of code that I will write.
The FreeBSD folks sorted it out for us.
Everyones names should be in the
> I think maybe the simplest thing is for me to prepare a patch that rips
> that code out and replaces it with a (slightly simpler - less umask
> hacking required, I think) piece of code that I will write.
The FreeBSD folks sorted it out for us.
Everyones names should be in the copyright for th
This whole thing is starting to make my head hurt. There has been more
effort spent over this license issue than I would have spent if I hadn't
taken the shortcut of using the FreeBSD code.
I think maybe the simplest thing is for me to prepare a patch that rips
that code out and replaces it wit
On Mon, Nov 17, 2003 at 02:48:08PM -0500, Rod Taylor wrote:
> The PostgreSQL group has recently had a patch submitted with a snippet
> of code from FreeBSDs src/bin/mkdir/mkdir.c.
>
> http://www.freebsd.org/cgi/cvsweb.cgi/src/bin/mkdir/mkdir.c?annotate=1.27
>
> Is this intentionally under the 4 c
On Mon, 17 Nov 2003 14:48:08 -0500
Rod Taylor <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> The PostgreSQL group has recently had a patch submitted with a snippet
> of code from FreeBSDs src/bin/mkdir/mkdir.c.
>
> http://www.freebsd.org/cgi/cvsweb.cgi/src/bin/mkdir/mkdir.c?annotate=1.27
This appears to be an ori
On 2003.11.17 14:48:08 -0500, Rod Taylor wrote:
> The PostgreSQL group has recently had a patch submitted with a snippet
> of code from FreeBSDs src/bin/mkdir/mkdir.c.
>
> http://www.freebsd.org/cgi/cvsweb.cgi/src/bin/mkdir/mkdir.c?annotate=1.27
>
> Is this intentionally under the 4 clause licens
The PostgreSQL group has recently had a patch submitted with a snippet
of code from FreeBSDs src/bin/mkdir/mkdir.c.
http://www.freebsd.org/cgi/cvsweb.cgi/src/bin/mkdir/mkdir.c?annotate=1.27
Is this intentionally under the 4 clause license or does the copyright
from the website (2 clause) applied
15 matches
Mail list logo