Re: GPLv3 Position Statement

Oleg Verych
2006-09-28T20:02:37Z

Sorry, but that pulled *my* trigger...

On 2006-09-28, linux-os (Dick Johnson) <linux-os@analogic.com> wrote:
> Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail
> From: "linux-os \(Dick Johnson\)" <linux-os@analogic.com>
> Newsgroups: gmane.linux.kernel
> Subject: Re: GPLv3 Position Statement
> Date: Thu, 28 Sep 2006 15:34:58 -0400
> Lines: 48
[...]
> Original-Received: from odyssey.analogic.com ([204.178.40.5]:5135 "EHLO odyssey.analogic.com") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1030383AbWI1TfG convert rfc822-to-8bit (ORCPT <rfc822;linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>); Thu, 28 Sep 2006 15:35:06 -0400
> Original-Received: from chaos.analogic.com ([10.112.50.11]) by phoenix.analogic.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.211); Thu, 28 Sep 2006 15:35:04 -0400
> X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.5.7226.0
> Original-Received: from chaos.analogic.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by chaos.analogic.com (8.12.11/8.12.11) with ESMTP id k8SJZ4wS031736; Thu, 28 Sep 2006 15:35:04 -0400
> Original-Received: (from linux-os@localhost) by chaos.analogic.com (8.12.11/8.12.11/Submit) id k8SJYweF031733; Thu, 28 Sep 2006 15:34:58 -0400
> X-OriginalArrivalTime: 28 Sep 2006 19:35:04.0187 (UTC) FILETIME=[3236ECB0:01C6E335]
> Content-class: urn:content-classes:message
> In-Reply-To: <E4B98A24-5632-4DA5-AD3A-37396D5EF1B3@kernel.crashing.org>
> X-MS-Has-Attach:
> X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
> Thread-Topic: GPLv3 Position Statement
> thread-index: AcbjNTJAPIVMpED0T6+AOQGqDk9Jbw==
> Original-To: "Segher Boessenkool" <segher@kernel.crashing.org>
> Original-Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
> Precedence: bulk
> X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
> Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.linux.kernel:450959
> Archived-At: <http://permalink.gmane.org/gmane.linux.kernel/450959>
>
>
> On Thu, 28 Sep 2006, Segher Boessenkool wrote:
>
>>> However, now some are beginning to see the light as history
>>> continues to be rewritten and a history lesson is unfolding.
>>
>>> These efforts go back to the days when
>>> "distributions" consisted of 56 floppy disks and Linus was
>>> in Helsinki, working on his degree. The FSF didn't exist, and
>>> GNU was the name of an immature compiler.
>>
>> The FSF was founded in 1985, now who is rewriting history
>> here :-) "GNU" never was the name for the compiler, either.
>>
>
> No. GNU was coined in 1984-85 (depending upon the source).
> It was a recursive 'GNU Not Unix', and referred to some free
> tools, including Eimacs. One of the most important tools
> was a compiler which could be readily ported to new operating
> systems. The GNU compiler was used in an attempt to make
> Hurd, an early Unix clone. It was also used by BSD and Linux.
>
>>> Sometimes we need
>>> to be reminded of the history of a particular thing because,
>>> once out-of-mind, history tends to be rewritten by those who
>>> would advance in its new "interpretation."
>>
>> I don't really want to know what you try to gain by this
>> "properly composed statement", heh.
>>
>> Segher
>>
>
> FYI, the place to research your information is not on www.gnu.org or
> Wikipedia, both of which are too self-serving (in this area) to be used
> as a reference. You need to dig deeper or ask someone who was there.

Or just look on e-mail headers of who is talking to you.

> Cheers,
> Dick Johnson
> Penguin : Linux version 2.6.16.24 on an i686 machine (5592.66 BogoMips).

Hmm...

> New book: http://www.AbominableFirebug.com/
> _
> \x1a\x04
>
> ****************************************************************
> The information transmitted in this message is confidential and may be privileged. Any review, retransmission, dissemination, or other use of this information by persons or entities other than the intended recipient is prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient, please notify Analogic Corporation immediately - by replying to this message or by sending an email to DeliveryErrors@analogic.com - and destroy all copies of this information, including any attachments, without reading or disclosing them.

Hmmmmmm.....

> Thank you.

No, no, thank you. Very much.

--