On Fri, 2005-07-15 at 01:49 -0700, John Bailo wrote: > >> So shouldn't OSX be licensed under GPL then? > > > > BSD. And much if it is. > > I still don't understand. > > Mach is owned by GNU ( or licensed under GPL ). > > If OSX is based -- or includes -- Mach code, then doesn't that GPL OSX?
Why don't you bother to go to the source? The information is all there: http://www.gnu.org/software/hurd/hurd.html Although they may start from a similar code base, GNU Mach is one thing, OS X's Mach is another almost entirely. Rui -- + No matter how much you do, you never do enough -- unknown + Whatever you do will be insignificant, | but it is very important that you do it -- Gandhi + So let's do it...? Please AVOID sending me WORD, EXCEL or POWERPOINT attachments. See http://www.fsf.org/philosophy/no-word-attachments.html
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
_______________________________________________ Gnu-misc-discuss mailing list [email protected] http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnu-misc-discuss
