Gentoo/FreeBSD On Hold Due To Licensing Issues 200
Alan Trick writes "Flameeyes (a Gentoo/FreeBSD developer) recently came up with some serious problems among the various *BSD projects who use BSD-4 licensed code (which is all of them). Even other projects like Open Darwin may be affected.
The saga started when he discovered the license problems with libkvm and start-stop-daemon. "libkvm is a userspace interface to FreeBSD kernel, and it's licensed under the original BSD license, BSD-4 if you want, the one with the nasty advertising clause." start-stop-daemon links to libkvm, but it's licensed under the GPL which is incompatible with the advertising clause. The good new is that the University of California/Berkley has given people permission to drop the advertising clause. The bad news is that libkvm has code from many other sources and each of them needs to give their permission for the license to be changed.
At the moment, development on the Gentoo/FreeBSD is on hold and the downloads have been removed from the Gentoo mirrors."
The saga started when he discovered the license problems with libkvm and start-stop-daemon. "libkvm is a userspace interface to FreeBSD kernel, and it's licensed under the original BSD license, BSD-4 if you want, the one with the nasty advertising clause." start-stop-daemon links to libkvm, but it's licensed under the GPL which is incompatible with the advertising clause. The good new is that the University of California/Berkley has given people permission to drop the advertising clause. The bad news is that libkvm has code from many other sources and each of them needs to give their permission for the license to be changed.
At the moment, development on the Gentoo/FreeBSD is on hold and the downloads have been removed from the Gentoo mirrors."
Someone didn't read his next email... (Score:5, Informative)
Re:hmmm (Score:5, Informative)
apple phasing out libkvm support (Score:3, Informative)
I just had to remove all dependencies on libkvm for a project I work on, since we recently had our first users try to use it on OS X x86. It is software used on HPC clusters and SMPs, so there hadn't been much interest in OS X x86 until the Xeon XServes. I had been trying to get a hold of an x86 system to test on for months, and then this problem hit us.
Obviously this could affect OS X/Darwin until they completely phase this out and remove libkvm objects and headers from the software distribution.
FUD (Score:5, Informative)
1. The clause that's being referred to is clause three which states:
2. I've gone through all 15 of the
The two files are copyright Wolfgang Solfrank and TooLs GmbH. I would submit that there is probably a clause three waiver from these folks; it's just that we haven't found it yet. Also, removing the two effected files would have no effect on functionality. Neither the ARM or PPC ports are functional.
The FUD here may not have been intentional, but it is FUD none the less.
Re:But wait a minute... (Score:2, Informative)
More information at: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BSD_Licenses [wikipedia.org]
And at: http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/bsd.html [gnu.org]
Re:Someone didn't read his next email... (Score:3, Informative)
I'm still using the same OS I did five years ago.. but I've upgraded through SEVERAL versions of gcc...
> Besides which, a recompile every month or so is good for your system.
What, is that the Gentoo equivalent of rebooting a Windows box? *!@*!*@!!
Re:Trouble in paradise (Score:3, Informative)
The lawyers would disagree. This is why we have copyleft in the form of the GNU GPL.
Re:But wait a minute... (Score:5, Informative)
What's amazing is that people cite to the FSF propoganda and conclude they've prove their point.
Well here is the truth of the matter: Clause 3 relates particularly to advertising that discusses the features implemented by the code given in clause 3. What this means is you want to brag about softupdates and softupdates were covered by this imfamous third clause, you would have to say 'as implemented by Kirk...'
Anyways, this only applies to advertising with sufficient specificity to implicate particular code. Basically if you can trace a feature to 100s of contributors the clause is self-invalidating. No one contribution was responsible for the feature discussed in the advertising, therefore no mention is required.
The whole topic has been FUD for twenty years. That said, it has been such good FUD that people have actually taken extensive effort to purge the clause from the standard license. Only a few small files retain it today.
I think DragonflyBSD which is forked from FreeBSD 4.x is 4-clause free.
Re:But wait a minute... (Score:3, Informative)
But the GPL specifies *no* additional restrictions, advertising clause is an additional restriction, end of story. That's all there is to it - 4 clause BSD license is not GPL compatible.
The PyDev extensions for Eclipse are distributed under a free license that includes the requirement that you take a deep breath and relax. That's a GPL-incompatible clause. Legal nitpicking is how you keep your house clean.
Re:Goofy (Score:2, Informative)
And the answer is... (Score:3, Informative)
All this painful discussion over what is probably a non-issue? Don't you just love this brave new world of 30 blogs linking to each other creating an artificial buzz/panic? Is this a case of premature eblogulation?
"clean interface"??? (Score:3, Informative)
Also, this ties you to a specific version of the kernel. It ties you to a specific patch level. If ever Apple changes the layout of a kernel data structure, you're screwed.
You call this clean??? Uh...
In your mind, what exactly does it take for an interface to be dirty? I'd love to see a few examples.