Kitkoan wrote on Oct 30, 2012, 11:42:
Wintermute wrote on Oct 30, 2012, 07:24:
Kitkoan wrote on Oct 30, 2012, 00:43:
Last I knew, the BSD is GPL.
You've been told that you are wrong and yet you insist on pulling facts out ass?
The GPL is not the same as the BSD, and that is why Apple went with the BSD one. It suited them better.
As I said, last I knew, not it is this. From what I read it was, this is why Darwin code its available but why it can't be compiled into a working OS because only what its needed to be open sourced is.
Now, instead of acting like a little bitch, could you stop swearing at me and explain the differences and why Darwin is open sourced but not complete? Or do you have no idea? I took a quick look at the BSD license before my last response and from what I read, it works pretty much the same as GPL.
BSD: you can modify and add new features to existing open source project, close it off, and sell it.
GPL: you can't. your changes must be open and in same GPL licence.
that said:
http://www.opensource.apple.com/