Re: Real sh? Or other efficient shell for non-interactive scripts

[Joerg Schilling <Joerg.Schilling@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Les Mikesell <lesmikesell@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:

> On Mon, Apr 27, 2015 at 2:13 PM, Joerg Schilling
> <Joerg.Schilling@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > Les Mikesell <lesmikesell@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> >
> > There was no court case, but VERITAS published a modifed version of gtar where
> > additional code was added by binary only libraries from VERITAS. The FSF did
> > never try to discuss this is public even though everybody did know about the
> > existence. As long as the FSF does not try to sue VERITAS, we are safe -
> > regardless what intentional nonsense you can read on the FSF webpages.
>
> I just remembered a counterpoint to this.  Back in the Windows 3.0
> days when windows had no tcp networking of its own, I put together a
> DOS binary built from gnutar and the wattcp stack so you could back up
> a windows or dos box to a unix system via rsh.    And when I tried to
> give it away I was contacted and told that I couldn't distribute it
> because even though wattcp was distributed in source, it had other
> conflicts with the GPL.  As a side effect of getting it to build on a

If you had the wattcp stack in a separate library and if you did make the 
needed changes for integration in the gtar source, this was fully legal.

I know that the FSF frequently tries to ask people to do things that are not on 
a legal base. They however know that they cannot go on trial with this...

Jörg

-- 
 EMail:joerg@xxxxxxxxxx                    (home) Jörg Schilling D-13353 Berlin
       joerg.schilling@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx (work) Blog: http://schily.blogspot.com/
 URL:  http://cdrecord.org/private/ http://sourceforge.net/projects/schilytools/files/'
_______________________________________________
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@xxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos