Re: BSD license, core libraries, and NetBSD
Scripsit "Joel Baker" <email@example.com>
> A) Is it feasible to have an old-BSD license based kernel and system
> libraries? This appears, on casual inspection, to qualify for the
> purpose of the GPL's 'system library' exception, in both spirit and
> letter, but I would hate to get bitten later.
The system-library exception expressly only applies "unless that
component accompanies the executable". Traditionally we hold it to
count as "accompanying" when the library as well as the GPL'ed stuff
appears in Debian's main archive. I've argued that this is the
interpretation that is most likely to fit RMS's intentions with the
> B) What is required to meet the advertising requirements of a 4-clause
> BSD license? Would it suffice to have the entirety of the list in the
> copyright file, and a pointer from release announcements?
Um, sorry for being slow, but what is a "4-clause" BSD license? One
that has positive as well as negative advertising clauses? Would such
a license even be internally consistent?
Henning Makholm "Nu kommer han. Kan du ikke høre knallerten?"