Article View: comp.sys.mac.apps
Article #1136Re: A/UX 3.0 vs. MachTen 2.0
From: Bill Johnston
Date: Sat, 08 Aug 1992 06:09
Date: Sat, 08 Aug 1992 06:09
21 lines
1546 bytes
1546 bytes
In article <15uuvlINN84c@smurf.smurf.sub.org> urlichs@smurf.sub.org (Matthias Urlichs) writes: [...concerning MacMach licensing: one point needs clarification...] >You also need a BSD source license because part of the CD consists of Apple's >source code. This statement is misleading. The BSD source license requirement stems from the BSD content, not Apple's contribution. There *was* some talk of Apple contributing a System 7 emulator that would run on top of MacMach. That might involve a _separate_ licensing issue, but Apple is *not* responsible for encumbering the Mach and Unix server parts of MacMach. Similar licensing requirements apply to CMU's Mach+BSD ports to other platforms. (Berkeley probably isn't responsible either; my guess is that the BSD stuff used in this particular project was not free of AT&T code.) -- -- Bill Johnston (johnston@me.udel.edu) -- 38 Chambers Street; Newark, DE 19711; (302)368-1949
Technical Details
Message-ID:
<BsnIF7.1EL@news.udel.edu>Path:
arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!sparky!uunet!wupost!tulane!darwin.sura.net!news.udel.edu!me.udel.edu!johnstonReferences:
<1992Jul29.052534.8303@monu6.cc.monash.edu.au> <1992Jul30.131516.11745@oswego.Oswego.EDU> <15uuvlINN84c@smurf.smurf.sub.org>Show Full Headers
Complete Article Headers
Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac.apps,comp.sys.mac.misc,comp.sys.mac.programmer,comp.unix.misc Path: arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!sparky!uunet!wupost!tulane!darwin.sura.net!news.udel.edu!me.udel.edu!johnston From: johnston@me.udel.edu (Bill Johnston) Subject: Re: A/UX 3.0 vs. MachTen 2.0 Message-ID: <BsnIF7.1EL@news.udel.edu> Sender: usenet@news.udel.edu Nntp-Posting-Host: me.udel.edu Organization: University of Delaware References: <1992Jul29.052534.8303@monu6.cc.monash.edu.au> <1992Jul30.131516.11745@oswego.Oswego.EDU> <15uuvlINN84c@smurf.smurf.sub.org> Date: Sat, 8 Aug 1992 06:09:07 GMT Lines: 21