Re: New BK License Problem?

Larry McVoy (lm@bitmover.com)
Sat, 5 Oct 2002 22:24:05 -0700

Messages sorted by: [ date ][ thread ][ subject ][ author ]
Next message: Andrew Morton: "Re: load additions to contest"
Next message: Martin J. Bligh: "Re: The reason to call it 3.0 is the desktop (was Re: [OT] 2.6 not 3.0 - (NUMA))"
Previous message: Tim Spriggs: "make menuconfig problem"
In reply to: Robert Love: "Re: New BK License Problem?"

On Sat, Oct 05, 2002 at 09:00:04PM -0400, Robert Love wrote:
> On Sat, 2002-10-05 at 20:53, Larry McVoy wrote:
>
> > If this turns into a serious thing we could polish up the bkbits.net
> > infrastructure and provide it with one extra URL that lets you get
> > gnu style patches. I already have the code for this, I just have it
> > disabled for bandwidth reasons.
>
> So are you saying I could look at Linus's tree on bkbits.net and click
> on a changeset and get a GNU diff?

No, I'm saying that I could give you the technology to do that if you wanted
to host on your server. Bandwidth == money. We already have a T1 line for
the kernel, we're not buying another one.

-- 
---
Larry McVoy            	 lm at bitmover.com           http://www.bitmover.com/lm 
-
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/






 Next message: Andrew Morton: "Re: load additions to contest"
 Next message: Martin J. Bligh: "Re: The reason to call it 3.0 is the desktop (was Re: [OT] 2.6 not 3.0 - (NUMA))"
 Previous message: Tim Spriggs: "make menuconfig problem"
 In reply to: Robert Love: "Re: New BK License Problem?"