[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> >On 11/06/07, Dev Mazumdar <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >> After much deliberation - we're going with CDDL for BSD. I don't know why
> >> OpenBSD can't work wit
> h CDDL since FreeBSD and NetBSD can.
> >>
> >
> >The only complaint I've ever seen is about header files not being able
> >to be included by default in the kernel and then have the binary
> >result distributed and not be CDDL. But that wasn't OpenBSD
> >specifically. Its the same complaint being made by BSD folks w/
> >DTrace.
>
> The binaries are never "under the CDDL"; they are under whatever binary
> license you have; the source is under the CDDL.
Smilar rules apply to the GPL. It is a common misstake to believe that
binaries from GPLd sources are under the GPL.
Binaries cannot be distributed under a license that is in conflict with
the source license, that's all.
Jörg
--
EMail:[EMAIL PROTECTED] (home) Jörg Schilling D-13353 Berlin
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (uni)
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (work) Blog: http://schily.blogspot.com/
URL: http://cdrecord.berlios.de/old/private/ ftp://ftp.berlios.de/pub/schily
_______________________________________________
opensolaris-discuss mailing list
[email protected]
