__/ [ Peter Köhlmann ] on Wednesday 08 March 2006 07:44 \__
> Erik Funkenbusch wrote:
>> On Wed, 08 Mar 2006 04:30:22 +0000, Roy Schestowitz wrote:
>>> "The source code reference license is a poisoned honeypot, from which
>>> free software operators shall stay away as much as possible," FSFE/Samba
>>> said in its filing."
>> What I find most ironic about these comments is that it's effectively
>> damning the GPL as well. If looking at the source code can be dangerous,
>> the same also goes for proprietary developers looking at GPL'd code.
>> This is, effectively, a tacit admission that anyone interested in
>> developing closed source software should avoid exposing your developers to
>> GPL'd code in any form.
>> How, exactly, isn't the GPL also a "poisoned honeypot"?
> Even *if* you were right, Erik (that is a mighty big "if")
> it still would mean what it means: MS "offer" to provide source instead of
> documentation is not only not enough, it is worth less than nothing
> You don't get to derail the thread so easily, Erik
As if to say: "Here's my garbage can. I'm sure you can help yourself to
finding that missing screw of yours..."
Closed-source development model produces different code from GPL'd code.
Could this also provide an explanation to:
,----[ Snippet ]
| What's noteworthy about it is that Microsoft compared Singularity to
| FreeBSD and Linux as well as Windows/XP - and almost every result shows
| Windows losing to the two Unix variants. For example, they show the
| number of CPU cycles needed to "create and start a process" as 1,032,000
| for FreeBSD, 719,000 for Linux, and 5,376,000 for Windows/XP."
Or, to have this discussion balanced, *this*?
,----[ Snippet ]
| Gaining root access to a Mac is "easy pickings", according to an
| individual who won an OS X hacking challenge last month by gaining
| root control of a machine using an unpublished security vulnerability.