At Fri, 13 Feb 2004 1:16pm +0200, Luchezar Georgiev wrote: > On Fri, 13 Feb 2004 11:13:20 +0100, Aitor SantamarÃa Merino wrote: > > > Otherwise it wouldn't be legal either that you provide an ISO file of > > a CD-ROM that contains GPL and non-GPL software: both are different > > types of sotware inside the same "file" entity. > > I agree completely with you, Aitor, and I also think that Michael has > made another very strong "GPL-atheist" point too. What a pity that the > kernel license can no longer be changed... :-( So we remain tied by its > ropes, alas! (OK, OK, before someone accuses me that I don't understand > the GPL again, I must admit that although I've read it in English and > Bulgarian many times, I still don't) > > Lucho
This is why I don't really like the GPL - the license is too complicated. I mean, I can live with it, but still. I've found myself at an impasse to do anything though because at this point my programming skills aren't sufficient. But I did have an idea to create a DOS with a simpler license, and I started work on it. (I have a command.com that works rather well but has a couple annoying bugs and limitations) I do take action on what I want to do. I'm trying to get into writing kernels, not only to write my own DOS kernel as an exercise, but also to write a clone of CP/M-86 as an exercise. Of course, I don't plan to REPLACE FreeDOS or any of its components. Just to offer an alternative. -uso. ------------------------------------------------------- SF.Net is sponsored by: Speed Start Your Linux Apps Now. Build and deploy apps & Web services for Linux with a free DVD software kit from IBM. Click Now! http://ads.osdn.com/?ad_id56&alloc_id438&op=click _______________________________________________ Freedos-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-devel
