Truly Understanding the "Unix Philosophy" - Psychology, Philosophy, and Licenses
Users browsing this thread: 5 Guest(s)
|
|||
(14-09-2016, 07:18 AM)pranomostro Wrote: I thought the BSDs were certified systems as well. Usually, SysV systems have a better chance to be a "certified UNIX". BSD has come a long way since their first Unix distribution. (14-09-2016, 07:18 AM)pranomostro Wrote: I mean, nobody needs a fortran compiler, amirite? Wrong. I even need a COBOL compiler. (OK, I don't. But it's nice to have one at hand.) (14-09-2016, 07:18 AM)pranomostro Wrote: If you perceive them as a political movement and not a technological one, they have done great work Oh yes, replacing the Public Domain (as it was common in the 60s: just share your tapes) by a long text about what you are not allowed to do. Awesome. There are reasons why I try to avoid using GPL software at all. (14-09-2016, 07:18 AM)pranomostro Wrote: convincing the BSD guys to go open source BSD was "open source" from the beginning. Unix was not. (That's why the early 90s were seeing the first "free BSD": The non-free code parts by AT&T had to be rewritten first.) -- <mort> choosing a terrible license just to be spiteful towards others is possibly the most tux0r thing I've ever seen |
|||
