> > Long ago it might not have been completely predictable > that > > many end > > points of the longest-developed paths of unix > development > > > (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Unix_history-simple.svg) Thank you for the link, a friend of mine has one in his classroom and it has 1969 as the birth of Unix, and in 1991/1992 the birth of Linux. Linux the kernel and combined with the GNU utilities started the Linux distribution. Another friend of mine also told me that many programs that are now in Linux, were either copied over from BSD/Solaris or ported to linux and were allowed to be shared across without restrictions :) However, we now now that there are GPL police out there and enforcing the GPL on people who modify the freely available code out there, but do not share their modifications :( Is Novell the owner of Unix? Is it SCO http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SCO_Group ? Does the GPL protect Linux users across the globe against malicious lawsuits claiming ownership of programs that are used? These are other questions that affect the status quo and what is done to correct issues. I also wonder if the GPL is a true open source model? Some posts here are pointing that it is not :(, I am still confused because of too much jargon present. http://www.opensource.org/ The GPL is there along with its multiple versions http://www.opensource.org/licenses/alphabetical According to the definition of Open Source, http://www.opensource.org/docs/osd The GPL then violates #9 in the definition <quote> 9. License Must Not Restrict Other Software The license must not place restrictions on other software that is distributed along with the licensed software. For example, the license must not insist that all other programs distributed on the same medium must be open-source software. </quote> or does it really violate it? Regards, Antonio -- fedora-list mailing list fedora-list@xxxxxxxxxx To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list
