🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <3379@jato.Jpl.Nasa.Gov> kaleb@mars.jpl.nasa.gov (Kaleb
Keithley) writes:

| I just read through all the back articles that we have at our site, and
| haven't seen this, so forgive me if it's been discussed before.
| 
| I was talking to an OSF employee yesterday, and he said (paraphrase mode on)
| OSF is currently working on producing MACH on behalf of the OSF consortium
| members, and that FSF was a major player/partner in this effort. (paraphrase
| mode off)

Warning: I work for OSF (in fact on FSF programs), and the following
is my interpertation.  It has not been blessed by management, so take
it for what it's worth.

OSF is using GCC, Gas, Gld, etc. as the compilers in it's reference
ports (Decstation (MIPS), Encore (National 32532), and Intel 386) of
OSF/1.  This is much like Data General and Next already does.
However, the FSF products are not part of OSF/1, but the source for
the appropriate products will be provided on the release media when
you order OSF/1.  Licensees may decide whether to use FSF technology
(providing they meet the GPL), or come up with compilers, linkers,
etc. on their own.

OSF through it's research institute has also given some amount of
money to FSF to encourage Open Software (I don't know how much).
Those of us in the compiler and loader groups also correspond with FSF
people in various tasks.

| Given OSF's reputation for source code licenses (good, as long as you're not
| a gov't contractor with lots of legal entanglements,) how will this
| "partnership" affect FSF's MACH, with specific regard to the availability of
| the source?

In this regard it shouldn't affect either FSF or CMU with regard to
Mach source (OSF/1 source which is derrived from various sources,
including Mach is of course a different manner).
--
Michael Meissner	email: meissner@osf.org		phone: 617-621-8861
Open Software Foundation, 11 Cambridge Center, Cambridge, MA

Catproof is an oxymoron, Childproof is nearly so