Re: Debian FreeBSD
John Goerzen <jgoerzen@complete.org> writes:
> This is a very bad idea.
>
> Why? The BSD license.
>
> We must not help software based on a BSD-licensed kernel no less
> become more prevelant. The reason is that the BSD license allows
> companies to commercialize the product. I for one disdain the idea of
> using SPI resources to help things that will become proprietary.
Whats the actual problem anyway?
If I understand this debian-FreeBSD stuff right, its just a port of
the Debian packages to the FreeBSD kernel, just like Debian-hurd is a
port to the hurd kernel.
You cannot change the license of a package without the propper
permissions and compiling it for a BSD licensed kernel doesn´t change
the license.
No firm can comercialise any package compiled for a BSD licensed
kernel unless that packages license allows that anyway.
The kernel carrying a bad license isn´t a valid reason to not port the
debian packages to it.
I dislike the ide for another reason, just as I dislike debian-hurd.
It bloats the archive without adding anything great. Debian-FreeBSD
(and debian-hurd) should only contain base, disks and a hand full of
additional packages like xaos, povray, <some other tool that can waste
hours of cpu time that benefits from multithreading>. Everything else
should use the same binary package.
May the Source be with you.
Goswin
Reply to: