[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: Not "Satanism;" realism.

To: James LewisMoss <dres@ioa.com>
Subject: Re: Not "Satanism;" realism.
From: Brett Glass <brett@lariat.org>
Date: Sun, 03 Jan 1999 20:43:26 -0700
Cc: Multiple recipients of list AM-INFO <am-info@essential.org>
In-Reply-To: <hh3e5tv47m.fsf@dres.elam.org>
References: <Brett Glass's message of "Sat, 2 Jan 1999 14:38:30 -0500"><4.1.19990102120124.05d85da0@mail.lariat.org>

At 02:56 PM 1/2/99 -0500, James LewisMoss wrote:

>Actually if i remember correctly both early Linux (it's mostly been
>rewritten now) and MS NT/Win95/Win3.1 TCP/IP stacks are all BSD based.

If the Linux TCP/IP stack is BSD-based, then the developers have violated
the license by failing to reproduce it in the source.

As for the Microsoft stack: it's not BSD-based. It's much closer to
SysV. 

--Brett

References:
- Re: Not "Satanism;" realism.
  - From: Brett Glass <brett@lariat.org>

Prev by Date: Re: Not "Satanism;" realism.
Next by Date: RE: Edison
Prev by thread: Re: Not "Satanism;" realism.
Next by thread: Re: Not "Satanism;" realism.
Index(es):
- Date
- Thread