From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from lists.gentoo.org ([140.105.134.102] helo=robin.gentoo.org) by nuthatch.gentoo.org with esmtp (Exim 4.62) (envelope-from ) id 1HsW9Z-0005Cs-Ml for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Mon, 28 May 2007 03:44:18 +0000 Received: from robin.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by robin.gentoo.org (8.14.0/8.14.0) with SMTP id l4S3gQKx013476; Mon, 28 May 2007 03:42:26 GMT Received: from mu-out-0910.google.com (mu-out-0910.google.com [209.85.134.188]) by robin.gentoo.org (8.14.0/8.14.0) with ESMTP id l4S3gQDS013471 for ; Mon, 28 May 2007 03:42:26 GMT Received: by mu-out-0910.google.com with SMTP id i10so1691063mue for ; Sun, 27 May 2007 20:42:26 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=beta; h=domainkey-signature:received:received:message-id:date:from:to:subject:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:references; b=uvOiairNU2/bYZUY+fPkYbtbDfvPjiGdyITVonIqstdTmLn+ydmbRyavstNjY188pHnE2hXTOu91hmy295uWQBXrUkZtdI7m1m3+dNFMsrarI6TVkm46/TRgHaQukVm3elnjLrgOZzUXRCupCJSWyyRizLRrwJTj+7fbfA415Xk= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=beta; h=received:message-id:date:from:to:subject:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:references; b=Y32lFCJvNlIcKvQVkAVNmyR8oSBTEWLVX/IrdWmFPisk1yjoJzUPlrmitRxEHSTcubKvE+b10k2X4dnVn9pZ/Pzg4z5hfCdGAbQYra5J5bBm5D+3fe2Q8ea345D0TDcpNPkoGFAbMSdmwQ1LhsuXAygP0gIcBZ4loHaPuVthbko= Received: by 10.82.176.3 with SMTP id y3mr9875887bue.1180323745992; Sun, 27 May 2007 20:42:25 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.82.122.4 with HTTP; Sun, 27 May 2007 20:42:25 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <7a329d910705272042p68c1fbacw46f246ee8d710f7@mail.gmail.com> Date: Sun, 27 May 2007 20:42:25 -0700 From: "Wil Reichert" To: gentoo-amd64@lists.gentoo.org Subject: Re: [gentoo-amd64] Re: Sun and GPL In-Reply-To: <20070528024149.4f6d918c@Bazaar> Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail X-BeenThere: gentoo-amd64@gentoo.org Reply-to: gentoo-amd64@lists.gentoo.org MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Disposition: inline References: <5bdc1c8b0705261207q2845c578rdf1d85bd2e4db1d@mail.gmail.com> <20070526165134.77091d7f@mandalor.homelinux.net> <200705270848.11742.gentoo102004@joerg.in-berlin.de> <20070527131103.770b71c6@Bazaar> <20070528024149.4f6d918c@Bazaar> X-Archives-Salt: 57deb81b-ed61-47b1-a708-60040e479fa9 X-Archives-Hash: e8de5093ed36e63b1ef4798e46040d22 On 5/27/07, Isidore Ducasse wrote: > le Sun, 27 May 2007 23:32:49 +0000 (UTC) > Duncan <1i5t5.duncan@cox.net> a =E9crit: > > > Not necessarily (or likely) /all/ their software, but significant parts > > of it. OpenSolaris is currently CDDL, which /is/ OSI approved as a rea= l > > "open" license, but was designed in part deliberately to be GPLv2 > > incompatible. Apparently, they weren't interested in Linux "stealing" > > their technologies, which they thought would happen if they made it GPL= v2 > > compatible. > > Solaris' dev team had diverging points of view about GPL being relevant f= or a private firm as Sun. Now it looks like there was room for a single con= ception over there. > > > They ARE considering dual-licensing Solaris under GPLv3, however, which > > they've been working closely with the FSF on. Of course that's not a > > given until it's out, but it'd definitely widen the interest base (I fo= r > > one may well be interested, especially if Linux stays GPLv2 only). > > You mean the bare kernel, right? Solaris' kernel could be an alternative = to linux? Is the latter really different from the *BSD's? I've installed a = NetBSD on my machine "for fun" recently (tho I switched back to using my go= od'ol gentoo, can't get used to anything else now. pkgsrc looks like a symp= athetic old auntie); it appears to practice monolithic kernel. What would b= e different in running a GPLv3 kernel? I've read about the anti-DRM part of= it; is there some other reason you/we could be interested in it? > > BTW isn't there a technical issue licensing a single version of a soft ag= ainst two incompatible licenses? Or did you mean dual-licensing GPLv2 and G= PLv3? > > > Of course Linus and the other kernel devs were originally very much > > against early GPLv3 drafts. > > Is it a matter of diverging positions towards industrial partners/users? > > > The Gentoo Java devs are working on it, but as I said, I don't > > believe enough of the entire Java infrastructure has been released as G= PL > > yet to do the entire thing as sources. Even after it has, it'll take > > several months as experimental ebuilds in the Java overlay (emerge laym= an > > and read up on using it, if interested) > > Ok! Does anyone know the difference between the java-overlay and the java= -gcj-overlay? > -- > gentoo-amd64@gentoo.org mailing list The thing I've wondered about GPL'ing java, is when do we finally get a native 64 bit browser plugin? Wil -- gentoo-amd64@gentoo.org mailing list