[lkml]   [2002]   [Oct]   [5]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: New BK License Problem?
On Sat, Oct 05, 2002 at 12:54:12PM -0700, Larry McVoy wrote:
> On Sat, Oct 05, 2002 at 03:47:09PM -0400, Nicolas Pitre wrote:
> > On Sat, 5 Oct 2002, Ulrich Drepper wrote:
> >
> > > I have never looked closer at bk than I had to be able to check out the
> > > latest sources. I'm not doing any development with it and I'm not
> > > checking in anything using bk.
> >
> > What about Larry making available a special version of BK that would only be
> > able to perform checkouts?
> >
> > This special version could have a less controversial license, even be GPL
> > with source. This only to provide a tool to extract data out of public BK
> > repositories (like Linus' kernel repository) for people who don't intend or
> > aren't willing to actually use the real value of the full fledged BK.
> You can do this today. rsync a BK tree and use GNU CSSC to check out
> the sources. We maintained SCCS compat for exactly that reason.
> You've had the ability to ignore the BKL since day one if you aren't
> running the BK binaries.

Whoops, forgot one thing. Take the GNU CSSC sources, they look for


at the top of the file. Make them accept both "h" and "H" and then it will
work. We changed it so that ATT SCCS would overwrite our metadata.
Larry McVoy lm at
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to
More majordomo info at
Please read the FAQ at

 \ /
  Last update: 2005-03-22 13:29    [W:0.726 / U:6.260 seconds]
©2003-2017 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site