From: MenTaLguY <mentalg@geocities.com>
  To  : ggi Mailingliste <ggi-develop@eskimo.com>
  Date: Sun, 19 Jul 1998 12:04:20 -0400 (EDT)

Re: libggi dependencies

> ??? very tolerant i think. these developers should rename their 'make world'
> to 'make my_fine_bsd_world'. 
> where is the problem in using gnu-tools ?? 
> is it just a religious one or a functional ?

Sort of both.  BSD tools are generally about as feature-rich as the GNU
tools (and some implementations are nicer than the GNU-ish equivalents --
check out their ports package system sometime, or the standard makefile
setup), but they also seem to be wildly incompatible in a few cases -- i.e.
BSD make uses $> instead of $< (the latter has worked in ALL other Unix
makes that I've tried).  I don't think they'd object except for the same
reason that they weren't very happy about LibGGI being LGPL'ed.  In
practice, LibGGI would be a component the system was dependent on, if they
used KGI. 

They basically feel that GPL is not a free license in the true sense of the
word, and as a result damages the point of the BSD license -- if a critical
part of the system can't be used in a way that plan BSD would allow, in
effect, the whole thing can't.  Freedom, to the BSD folks, means that you
can do whatever you want with the source code, provided appropriate credit
is given.  GPL restricts your ability to do certain things like use the
software in a commercial product without returning source to the community.

Being forced to use GPLed tools to develop a component of a *BSD system
component is almost as bad for them.  It'd basically damage the efficacy of
the BSD license.

-=MenTaLguY=-