Re: KDE questions
Chris Lawrence wrote:
> On Jun 07, Dan Brosemer wrote:
> > OpenSSH is an attempt to make SSH free software, not to de-GNU-ify it. The
> > reason it's under a BSD-esque license is because that's the license Tatu
> > Ylonen put SSH 1.1.12 under (that was the starting point for OpenSSH).
> > Nobody's going through any trouble to de-GNU-ify anything.
> Actually, they took a release of SSH that had both BSD and GPL code,
> and removed the GPLed code (technically, dependencies on GPLed code).
> Hence, it was de-GNU-ified as well as freed.
> >From http://lwn.net/1999/1028/a/openssh.html, a press release from the
> OpenBSD project:
> "All proprietary code in the original distribution was replaced, along
> with some libraries burdened with the restrictive GNU Public License
> (GPL). Much of of the actual cryptographic code was replaced by calls
> to the crypto libraries built into OpenBSD. The source code is now
> completely freely re-useable, and vendors are encouraged to re-use it
> if they need ssh functionality."
> (Never mind that they misidentify the GPL.)
Ha, ha. This is so funny. :P Someone's writing some bag of C code, and someone
else is deleting the files written by that person, and rewriting them
to make it get along with his favorite license. What a waste of time!
This might be pointing at the weakest point in the free/open source
And I think this rewriting thing is so stupid. Can't people just add additional
terms to make their license compatible with other licenses? Yeah, you
can distribute more than one license for a program, can't you? What's the
point here; I could of course take gcc and rewrite it to make it non-GPL'ed,
by doing what? Rewrite every line, but in a slightly different way? I mean
the algorithms, the specifications are entirely the same but it's just like
some cheating CS101 students... There's something funny going on here.
++++-+++-+++-++-++-++--+---+----+----- --- -- - -
+ Eray "exa" Ozkural . . . . . .
+ CS, Bilkent University, Ankara ^ . o . .
| mail: firstname.lastname@example.org . ^ . .