Why not GNU cmp?
frase at frase.id.au
Fri Sep 26 04:14:24 UTC 2008
On Thu, Sep 25, 2008 at 08:41:23AM -0400, Bob McConnell wrote:
> On Behalf Of Chad Perrin
> >On Thu, Sep 25, 2008 at 08:34:50AM +0100, Kris Kennaway wrote:
> >> Unga wrote:
> >> >I was wondering why FreeBSD wrote their own version of cmp. If it
> just the
> >> >license, then that's fine. I prefer the BSD versions of diff, etc.
> >> >available.
> >> You are asking the wrong questions: why did GNU write their own
> >> of cmp? FreeBSD's dates to 1987.
> > Y'know -- that's a really good question.
> The answer is simple. The BSD license does not guarantee freedom as
> defined by RMS.
> * The freedom to run the program, for any purpose (freedom 0).
> * The freedom to study how the program works and adapt it to
> your needs (freedom 1). Access to the source code is a precondition.
> * The freedom to redistribute copies so you can help your neighbor
> (freedom 2).
> * The freedom to improve the program and release your improvements
> to the public, so that the whole community benefits (freedom 3).
> Access to the source code is a precondition.
> For example, Microsoft uses many of the TCP applications and drivers
> from BSD, but will not allow access to their source code as required by
> freedoms 1 and 3.
> Bob McConnell
The BSD license -is- a free software license as defined by the FSF.
It is not copyleft like the GPL, but it is satisfies the four essential
freedoms. RMS agrees.
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Size: 195 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-questions/attachments/20080926/eb12da8a/attachment.pgp
More information about the freebsd-questions