| To: | james rich <james.rich@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> |
|---|---|
| Subject: | Re: Interest from the FreeBSD camp |
| From: | Christoph Hellwig <hch@xxxxxxxxxx> |
| Date: | Wed, 13 Jun 2001 19:48:22 +0200 |
| Cc: | "Nathan J. Mehl" <memory@xxxxxxxxx>, Russell Cattelan <cattelan@xxxxxxxxxxx>, Eric Sandeen <sandeen@xxxxxxx>, Juha Saarinen <juha@xxxxxxxxxxxx>, linux-xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx |
| In-reply-to: | <Pine.GSO.4.05.10106131114130.26115-100000@pipt.oz.cc.utah.edu>; from james.rich@m.cc.utah.edu on Wed, Jun 13, 2001 at 11:19:53AM -0600 |
| References: | <20010613024149.Z8330@blank.org> <Pine.GSO.4.05.10106131114130.26115-100000@pipt.oz.cc.utah.edu> |
| Sender: | owner-linux-xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx |
| User-agent: | Mutt/1.2.5i |
On Wed, Jun 13, 2001 at 11:19:53AM -0600, james rich wrote:
> On Wed, 13 Jun 2001, Nathan J. Mehl wrote:
>
> > expect that if Sun thought they could gain some sort of competetive
> > advantage from shipping Solaris 9 with XFS, they'd simply go ahead and
> > do so with the existing GPL code.
>
> Since XFS integrates with the OS they would have to GPL Solaris (I think)
> - not likely.
They already have a GPLed ext2fs-implementation, if you want to sue them
do it now.
Christoph
--
Of course it doesn't work. We've performed a software upgrade.
|
| Previous by Date: | Re: Interest from the FreeBSD camp, ctooley |
|---|---|
| Next by Date: | xfs and lilo on a second disk, Rob Lembree |
| Previous by Thread: | Re: Interest from the FreeBSD camp, james rich |
| Next by Thread: | Re: Interest from the FreeBSD camp, Nathan J. Mehl |
| Indexes: | [Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists] |