Re: If it exists, DR LX probably violates the GPL

Re: If it exists, DR LX probably violates the GPL
Re: Re: If it exists, DR LX probably violates the GPL -- lucho	Post Reply	Top of the thread	Forum

Posted by: Udo Kuhnt

05/16/2006, 17:40:01

There might be yet another possibility - they might have used a
non-GPL(!) version of the Linux kernel. Linux without the GPL license,
that sounds like a complete contradiction, doesn't it? Well, read the
story linked below:

Related link: Linux and the Cherokee Indians

Post Reply

Where am i? Original Post Top of the thread

Followups

:-x Re: Solera Networks and DRDOS Inc. --- lucho ( 05/16/2006, 19:57:39 ) ( 621 bytes ) +2
- Re: Solera Networks and DRDOS Inc. --- Udo Kuhnt ( 05/16/2006, 22:57:37 ) ( 870 bytes ) +2
  - Re: What is DR LX? --- lucho ( 05/17/2006, 08:16:22 ) ( 28 bytes )
  - Re: Solera Networks and DRDOS Inc. --- Liu ( 05/21/2006, 19:43:54 ) ( 356 bytes )
- Re: Solera Networks and DRDOS Inc. --- bttr ( 05/21/2006, 16:46:48 ) ( 42 bytes ) +1
  - Re: DR LX --- Udo Kuhnt ( 05/21/2006, 19:27:13 ) ( 452 bytes ) +1
    - Re: DR LX --- lucho ( 05/22/2006, 11:47:37 ) ( 43 bytes ) +1
      - Re: DR LX --- 8086 ( 05/22/2006, 11:58:21 ) ( 329 bytes ) +2
        
        Re: DRLX --- lucho ( 05/22/2006, 17:49:31 ) ( 150 bytes )
        Re: DR LX --- Flo ( 05/22/2006, 19:45:25 ) ( 262 bytes ) +1
        
        :-x Re: DR DOS Incorporated --- lucho ( 06/13/2006, 17:42:33 ) ( 291 bytes ) +1
        
        Re: DR DOS, Inc. "virtualised" --- lucho ( 06/18/2006, 08:51:41 ) ( 93 bytes )

The DR-DOS/OpenDOS Enhancement Project