[K12OSN] needed: recommendations for Linux flavor with ongoing support

[Les Mikesell]

On Wed, 2007-01-03 at 14:06 -0500, "Terrell Prudé Jr." wrote:

> >> Errr... GPL3 can only prevent distribution of GPL3 covered code,
> >> not slow down anything else.  I'm not sure why anyone wants
> >> that to happen.
> >>
> > Allison resigned because while the deal may not violate the letter of
> > the law, it does violate the intent of it;

I think the intent is that samba/Linux should not contain anything
that anyone else could sue about anyway, so the agreement is
irrelevant unless that point has already been violated...

>  that's why Samba will move
> > to GPL3 in the next release.

Perhaps further restricting the samba code, but again it is
irrelevant.  If it contains material patented by Microsoft
it is already illegal to distribute.

> And let's not forget GCC, glibc, bash, and all the other software on
> which the FSF owns copyright.  The FSF has made it very clear that
> virtually all of that software will be GPL3'd.  Oops, kinda hard to make
> a functional distro w/o glibc...or grep...or awk...or sed...unless you
> want to port FreeBSD's libc, etc.  Maybe that's what Novell will have to do.
> 
> The SuSE distro does have an component of actual danger to it as well. 
> When that five-year "no suing" agreement ends, either Microsoft demands
> greater extortion^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H fees, or Microsoft starts going
> after SuSE customers.  Novell has a nice, handy-dandy list of all of its
> customers, and due to the agreement with MS, it might be easier to
> subpoena that list...if MS doesn't already have it.  No, I wouldn't risk
> my business--or my district--by going with SuSE anymore.

I'm not sure I'd want to bet a business on gcc not accidentally
containing something covered by someone's patent either.

-- 
  Les Mikesell
   les at futuresource.com