[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [MiNT] uname reply - a final proposition
On Wed, 3 Feb 1999, Martin-Eric Racine wrote:
> PS: Atari Corp. is gone, so is the copyright on MiNT still an issue?
> Can't we just finally use the more generic "MiNT" instead of
> "Fresh/Free/Friggin/FryingMiNT" to identify our OS??
According to Eric Smith, it IS still an issue. (When he reminded us about
that on this list, Atari Corp was in exactly the same situation as it is
now). What's so terrible about calling it FreeMiNT? Isn't that what
everybody agreed on when MiNT development was taken over?
So apart from the fact that officially calling the kernel MiNT instead of
FreeMiNT might be illegal (depending on what's left of the copyrights),
it's VERY unfair.
It might be discutable whether uname gives the kernel name but I still
don't see any good reason for NOT having it say "FreeMiNT". If we go on
digging in copyright issues we might as well decide to call the
combination of TOS and MiNT a new TOS version and simply name it TOS 8.x
* I don't believe in camera tricks.
* What's more stupid than making a not-millenium-proof operating system?
** Doing so in 1998.
Maurits van de Kamp (firstname.lastname@example.org)
_____ B A S S M E N T P R O D U C T I O N S _____
/ /\\ >> http://www.bassment.demon.nl << / /\\
/ /=/ \ ________________________________ / /=/ \
| \/ | / Black Currant \ | \/ |
| /\ | | email@example.com | | /\ |
\ /=/ / | Purple Trance | \ /=/ /
\\/____ / \ firstname.lastname@example.org/ \\/____ /
\ \______________________________/ /