Re: openbkweb-0.0

Christoph Hellwig (hch@infradead.org)
Tue, 18 Feb 2003 17:41:25 +0000

Messages sorted by: [ date ][ thread ][ subject ][ author ]
Next message: Grover, Andrew: "RE: 2.5.xx ACPI/Sb16 IRQ conflict"
Previous message: Andy Pfiffer: "[Fastboot] [KEXEC][2.5.61][2.5.62] Untested patches available"
In reply to: Henning Schmiedehausen: "Re: openbkweb-0.0"

On Sun, Feb 16, 2003 at 09:26:15PM +0100, Henning Schmiedehausen wrote:
> The problem I have is, that at some point the BK company might be forced
> to change the rules. Maybe Larry isn't in charge anymore. Maybe he needs
> money. Maybe at some point kernel development _relies_ on BK. What if BK
> decides that there are no more free licenses from this day on?

Then we'll have to go back to old-style no-SCM releases.

> I have a problem with a core product of the free software movement

Who said Linux is part of the Free Software Movement? Remember that Linus
is no fanatical GNU monk, unless I got something completly wrong he even
writes propritary software in his daytime job..

-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/

Next message: Grover, Andrew: "RE: 2.5.xx ACPI/Sb16 IRQ conflict"
Previous message: Andy Pfiffer: "[Fastboot] [KEXEC][2.5.61][2.5.62] Untested patches available"
In reply to: Henning Schmiedehausen: "Re: openbkweb-0.0"