From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Wed, 29 May 2002 10:20:32 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Wed, 29 May 2002 10:20:31 -0400 Received: from sprocket.loran.com ([209.167.240.9]:48883 "EHLO ottonexc1.peregrine.com") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id ; Wed, 29 May 2002 10:20:29 -0400 Subject: Re: A reply on the RTLinux discussion. From: Dana Lacoste To: Alan Cox Cc: Mark Mielke , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org In-Reply-To: <1022685475.4124.229.camel@irongate.swansea.linux.org.uk> Content-Type: text/plain Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mailer: Ximian Evolution 1.0.5 Date: 29 May 2002 10:20:29 -0400 Message-Id: <1022682030.9044.8.camel@dlacoste.ottawa.loran.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Wed, 2002-05-29 at 11:17, Alan Cox wrote: > On Wed, 2002-05-29 at 14:54, Dana Lacoste wrote: > > This would be retarded. I mean, seriously, making the linux kernel > > require anybody who's doing any commercial real-time stuff pay Victor > > proprietary, not commercial. Which brings us back to Larry's comments on business models. It's becoming increasingly difficult to operate a non-proprietary commercial software business these days. I wish it weren't so, but it IS. If RedHat is filing patents, then it's fairly apparent that RedHat thinks so too, isn't it? Dana Lacoste Ottawa, Canada