Mail Archive Search: <+subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*system\s+call\s+documentation\s+\[license\s+question\]\s*$/>

Results:

References: [ +subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*system\s+call\s+documentation\s+\[license\s+question\]\s*$/: 15 ]

Total 15 documents matching your query.

1. Re: system call documentation [license question] (score: 1): Author: Andreas Gruenbacher <ag@xxxxxxxxxxx>; Date: Sun, 2 Feb 2003 16:40:39 +0100 (CET); The man pages are intended to be GPL licensed, while libacl (and libattr) was originally intended to be under LGPL. I have been quite lazy on putting that right into the package. I assume that nobody; /archives/xfs/2003-02/msg00011.html (9,420 bytes)
2. Re: system call documentation [license question] (score: 1): Author: Andi Kleen <ak@xxxxxxx>; Date: Sun, 2 Feb 2003 16:50:17 +0100; [l-k dropped from cc because there are already too many off-topic threads IMHO GPL or LGPL doesn't make much sense for documentation. For example if someone printed them out and sold them as book wou; /archives/xfs/2003-02/msg00012.html (9,159 bytes)
3. Re: system call documentation [license question] (score: 1): Author: Christoph Hellwig <hch@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>; Date: Sun, 2 Feb 2003 18:55:27 +0000; At least the Debian folks considere this license non-free (and I fully agree with tham, not that it matters..), so there's a singnificant part of the Linux userbase that won't easily get them. I'd be; /archives/xfs/2003-02/msg00013.html (9,100 bytes)
4. Re: system call documentation [license question] (score: 1): Author: Christoph Hellwig <hch@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>; Date: Sun, 2 Feb 2003 19:03:24 +0000; (Small addition before I get flamed heavily) The FSF-advocacy of the FDL is optional, but even this part beeing written down in the FDL makes it hard to find out whether something FDL-licensed actual; /archives/xfs/2003-02/msg00014.html (9,345 bytes)
5. Re: system call documentation [license question] (score: 1): Author: Chris Wedgwood <cw@xxxxxxxx>; Date: Sun, 2 Feb 2003 11:16:39 -0800; what about "do what you want; but don't blame, sue or call me if stuff breaks" ? does retention of a name really matter than much to ones ego? --cw; /archives/xfs/2003-02/msg00015.html (8,870 bytes)
6. Re: system call documentation [license question] (score: 1): Author: Andreas Gruenbacher <ag@xxxxxxxxxxx>; Date: Sun, 2 Feb 2003 16:40:39 +0100 (CET); The man pages are intended to be GPL licensed, while libacl (and libattr) was originally intended to be under LGPL. I have been quite lazy on putting that right into the package. I assume that nobody; /archives/xfs/2003-02/msg00495.html (9,420 bytes)
7. Re: system call documentation [license question] (score: 1): Author: Andi Kleen <ak@xxxxxxx>; Date: Sun, 2 Feb 2003 16:50:17 +0100; [l-k dropped from cc because there are already too many off-topic threads IMHO GPL or LGPL doesn't make much sense for documentation. For example if someone printed them out and sold them as book wou; /archives/xfs/2003-02/msg00496.html (9,159 bytes)
8. Re: system call documentation [license question] (score: 1): Author: Christoph Hellwig <hch@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>; Date: Sun, 2 Feb 2003 18:55:27 +0000; At least the Debian folks considere this license non-free (and I fully agree with tham, not that it matters..), so there's a singnificant part of the Linux userbase that won't easily get them. I'd be; /archives/xfs/2003-02/msg00497.html (9,100 bytes)
9. Re: system call documentation [license question] (score: 1): Author: Christoph Hellwig <hch@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>; Date: Sun, 2 Feb 2003 19:03:24 +0000; (Small addition before I get flamed heavily) The FSF-advocacy of the FDL is optional, but even this part beeing written down in the FDL makes it hard to find out whether something FDL-licensed actual; /archives/xfs/2003-02/msg00498.html (9,345 bytes)
10. Re: system call documentation [license question] (score: 1): Author: Chris Wedgwood <cw@xxxxxxxx>; Date: Sun, 2 Feb 2003 11:16:39 -0800; what about "do what you want; but don't blame, sue or call me if stuff breaks" ? does retention of a name really matter than much to ones ego? --cw; /archives/xfs/2003-02/msg00499.html (8,870 bytes)
11. Re: system call documentation [license question] (score: 1): Author: Andreas Gruenbacher <ag@xxxxxxxxxxx>; Date: Sun, 2 Feb 2003 16:40:39 +0100 (CET); The man pages are intended to be GPL licensed, while libacl (and libattr) was originally intended to be under LGPL. I have been quite lazy on putting that right into the package. I assume that nobody; /archives/xfs/2003-02/msg00979.html (9,451 bytes)
12. Re: system call documentation [license question] (score: 1): Author: Andi Kleen <ak@xxxxxxx>; Date: Sun, 2 Feb 2003 16:50:17 +0100; [l-k dropped from cc because there are already too many off-topic threads there] IMHO GPL or LGPL doesn't make much sense for documentation. For example if someone printed them out and sold them as b; /archives/xfs/2003-02/msg00980.html (9,299 bytes)
13. Re: system call documentation [license question] (score: 1): Author: Christoph Hellwig <hch@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>; Date: Sun, 2 Feb 2003 18:55:27 +0000; At least the Debian folks considere this license non-free (and I fully agree with tham, not that it matters..), so there's a singnificant part of the Linux userbase that won't easily get them. I'd be; /archives/xfs/2003-02/msg00981.html (9,291 bytes)
14. Re: system call documentation [license question] (score: 1): Author: Christoph Hellwig <hch@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>; Date: Sun, 2 Feb 2003 19:03:24 +0000; (Small addition before I get flamed heavily) The FSF-advocacy of the FDL is optional, but even this part beeing written down in the FDL makes it hard to find out whether something FDL-licensed actual; /archives/xfs/2003-02/msg00982.html (9,548 bytes)
15. Re: system call documentation [license question] (score: 1): Author: Chris Wedgwood <cw@xxxxxxxx>; Date: Sun, 2 Feb 2003 11:16:39 -0800; what about "do what you want; but don't blame, sue or call me if stuff breaks" ? does retention of a name really matter than much to ones ego? --cw; /archives/xfs/2003-02/msg00983.html (9,008 bytes)

Current List: 1 - 15
Page: [1]