Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Sat, 8 Mar 2003 11:30:39 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Sat, 8 Mar 2003 11:30:39 -0500 Received: from pizda.ninka.net ([216.101.162.242]:23505 "EHLO pizda.ninka.net") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id ; Sat, 8 Mar 2003 11:30:38 -0500 Date: Sat, 08 Mar 2003 08:22:24 -0800 (PST) Message-Id: <20030308.082224.130739242.davem@redhat.com> To: torvalds@transmeta.com Cc: zippel@linux-m68k.org, david.lang@digitalinsight.com, hpa@zytor.com, rmk@arm.linux.org.uk, greg@kroah.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [BK PATCH] klibc for 2.5.64 - try 2 From: "David S. Miller" In-Reply-To: References: <20030308.080317.27972826.davem@redhat.com> X-FalunGong: Information control. X-Mailer: Mew version 2.1 on Emacs 21.1 / Mule 5.0 (SAKAKI) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 790 Lines: 20 From: Linus Torvalds Date: Sat, 8 Mar 2003 08:35:24 -0800 (PST) The thing is, this discussion has _not_ been exactly neutral. You may have said "could" or "might" or whatever, but clearly people are trying to pressure hpa into going to GPL. It's the whole tone of the thread. Or would you disagree with that? The tone of parts of this thread, sure. Did my intentions match this? Absolutely not. I couldn't justify my use of bitkeeper if I didn't believe in personal choice about licenses. - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/