check out the site
http://dict.die.net/clone/
E.g. "Unix clone": An operating system designed to deliver a
Unix-like environment without Unix licence fees or with
additional "mission-critical" features such as support for
real-time programming.
another link for clone
http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&lr=&q=definition%3A+clone&btnG=Search
http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&lr=&oi=defmore&q=define:Solaris
On Tue, 15 Mar 2005 19:02:36 +0530 (IST), Sivasankar Chander
<siva@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
The issue is not whether the source is visible - rather, the
I heard that Windows CE source code has been released.
issue is whether subsequent modifications are allowed, and
who owns the code and the subsequent modifications. If
it's all going to belong to the original owner (like most
'shared source' initiatives), there's no reason anybody is
going to waste their time and effort trying to improve it.
Very big difference from any piece of GPLed code, including
Linux. If I contribute a patch, I own the copyright to it under
the GPL.
There's no particular reason I can think of to even
browse through the allegedly 'released' Windows CE source.
OTOH, there's every reason to avoid looking at it altogether,
to preempt tainting GPLed code through subsequent contributions.
-Siva
_______________________________________________
To unsubscribe, email ilugc-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx with
"unsubscribe <password> <address>"
in the subject or body of the message.
http://www.ae.iitm.ac.in/mailman/listinfo/ilugc
