# BSD licensed software



## mipam007 (Aug 18, 2011)

Dear All,

Do anybody know, if somewhere is possible to search software under BSD license?

Thanks much!


----------



## mipam007 (Aug 18, 2011)

Ha!! In Makefile is LICENSE line 

`find /usr/ports/ -name Makefile | xargs grep 'LICENSE=        BSD' | wc -l`

but it shows me 

```
0
```
do you have better idea?
Thanks


----------



## SirDice (Aug 18, 2011)

mipam007 said:
			
		

> ```
> find /usr/ports/ -name Makefile | xargs grep 'LICENSE=        BSD' | wc -l
> ```



Try grepping a regexp: 
	
	



```
grep -E "LICENSE=\W+BSD"
```


----------



## mipam007 (Aug 18, 2011)

SirDice said:
			
		

> Try grepping a regexp:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


it still returnig 0


----------



## SirDice (Aug 18, 2011)

Works fine:

```
dice@molly:/usr/ports>find /usr/ports/ -name 'Makefile' | xargs grep -E "LICENSE=\W+BSD" | wc -l
     448
```


----------



## mipam007 (Aug 18, 2011)

SirDice said:
			
		

> Works fine:
> 
> ```
> dice@molly:/usr/ports>find /usr/ports/ -name 'Makefile' | xargs grep -E "LICENSE=\W+BSD" | wc -l
> ...



yes, it is working now...my fault...thanks much!


----------



## mipam007 (Aug 18, 2011)

we had a fiery discussion with colleagues what would be the BSD without the presence of GPL software regarding window managers, so I found at least one wm


```
/usr/ports/x11-wm/enlightenment/Makefile:LICENSE=       BSD
```

:e:e:e


----------



## SirDice (Aug 18, 2011)

Don't forget, the MIT license is similar:

```
/usr/ports/x11-wm/blackbox/Makefile:LICENSE=    MIT
```


----------



## kpedersen (Aug 18, 2011)

The OpenCDE desktop environment is under the BSD license (...though it's Motif Window Manager is under a much more restrictive license)


----------



## roddierod (Aug 18, 2011)

Fluxbox is also BSD.

Not all Makefiles include the LICENSE line, i3 for example.


----------



## kpedersen (Aug 18, 2011)

dwm is another MIT license.

But then again, who cares what license the window manager is? They are almost always open-source and thus always available to you.


----------



## mipam007 (Aug 19, 2011)

Good to know guys - mostly about Fluxbox and DWM !!!


----------



## nekoexmachina (Aug 19, 2011)

The thing which I could never understand:
Why should user care of the license while the software *is still free to use and modify* does the job?
Thats just seems sick for me.


----------



## mipam007 (Aug 19, 2011)

nekoexmachina said:
			
		

> The thing which I could never understand:



probably not your fault that you do not understand 



			
				nekoexmachina said:
			
		

> Why should user care of the license while the software is still free to use and modify  does the job?


Why not? Why you are interested of this post, if you don't care of licensing?



			
				nekoexmachina said:
			
		

> Thats just seems sick for me.


all of what we're here, we are sick, dude


----------



## nekoexmachina (Aug 19, 2011)

> Why you are interested of this post, if you don't care of licensing?


Cause I wanna understand why do you care.


> all of what we're here, we are sick, dude


And thats not that bad it sounds, huh? I did not mean the 'bad-way' sickness.


----------



## mipam007 (Aug 19, 2011)

nekoexmachina said:
			
		

> Cause I wanna understand why do you care.


Good.....!

Question of boys' indiscretion - nothing intelligent. It was a stupid discussion where someone claimed that under the BSD license you will not compose full desktop.... that the BSD license is nonsense.



> And thats not that bad it sounds, huh? I did not mean the 'bad-way' sickness.


good to know


----------



## mipam007 (Aug 19, 2011)

but you know... not all of us want to use GNU/GPL software, because the company policy, etc.


----------



## SirDice (Aug 19, 2011)

mipam007 said:
			
		

> that the BSD license is nonsense.


You might want to mention to them that Cisco's IOS and Juniper's JunOS are both based on FreeBSD, something that wouldn't be possible without the BSD license :e


----------



## mipam007 (Aug 19, 2011)

SirDice said:
			
		

> You might want to mention to them that Cisco's IOS and Juniper's JunOS are both based on FreeBSD, something that wouldn't be possible without the BSD license :e



I didn't know about IOS! But I know from which egg JunOS is. And this is point of our never ending stupid discussion - is this correct or not - take a code, rewrite it, use it and close it???


----------



## SirDice (Aug 19, 2011)

mipam007 said:
			
		

> is this correct or not - take a code, rewrite it, use it and close it???


If it has the BSD license, yes, that's possible. Something the GPL absolutely forbids. And it's the biggest difference between the two. So you could argue the BSD license is more free as it allows you to do absolutely everything with it, including building something and closing the resulting source.


----------



## mipam007 (Aug 19, 2011)

SirDice said:
			
		

> If it has the BSD license, yes, that's possible. Something the GPL absolutely forbids. And it's the biggest difference between the two. So you could argue the BSD license is more free as it allows you to do absolutely everything with it, including building something and closing the resulting source.



Yes, that's correct. But only a few human beings that understands... ï¿½e


----------



## xibo (Aug 19, 2011)

> > And this is point of our never ending stupid discussion - is this correct or not - take a code, rewrite it, use it and close it???
> 
> 
> If it has the BSD license, yes, that's possible. Something the GPL absolutely forbids. And it's the biggest difference between the two.


Another selling point of the BSD Licence is that any graduate of an elementary school should be able to understand it, and it takes only a minute or two to read it.

The GPL on the other hand requires the summit of lawyers to tell what's inside, and they'd probably need a day or two to find out first.


----------



## SirDice (Aug 19, 2011)

xibo said:
			
		

> The GPL on the other hand requires the summit of lawyers to tell what's inside, and they'd probably need a day or two to find out first.



And still get it wrong at times


----------



## mipam007 (Aug 19, 2011)

Yes, I entirely agree...!

But guys, are we really able to live on our FreeBSD installations without GPL[1-3] software? Do we have truly option to completely switch to applications under BSD/MIT license?


----------



## UNIXgod (Aug 19, 2011)

MIT license is essentially the same as the BSD license.

Unless your modifying the code or using a library it shouldn't matter what license it is.


----------



## UNIXgod (Aug 19, 2011)

mipam007 said:
			
		

> But guys, are we really able to live on our FreeBSD installations without GPL[1-3] software? Do we have truly option to completely switch to applications under BSD/MIT license?



grep() is still gnu. feel free to re-implement it.


----------



## mipam007 (Aug 22, 2011)

UNIXgod said:
			
		

> grep() is still gnu. feel free to re-implement it.



http://wiki.freebsd.org/BSDgrep


----------



## ericbsd (Jan 27, 2012)

Have a look on that. http://copyfree.org/software/#WM


----------



## fonz (Jan 28, 2012)

UNIXgod said:
			
		

> grep() is still gnu. feel free to re-implement it.


FreeBSD appears to be actively moving away from GPL crap (the license is crap, not necessarily the product itself; some of the GNU tools are actually pretty darn good) to more sensibly-licensed stuff. But this cannot be done overnight and is therefore a gradual process.

Fonz

P.S. Reimplementing grep(1) probably requires an M.Sc (at least) in computer science, specialised in formal language and automaton theory (a.k.a. theoretical C.S.).


----------



## UNIXgod (Jan 28, 2012)

fonz said:
			
		

> FreeBSD appears to be actively moving away from GPL crap (the license is crap, not necessarily the product itself; some of the GNU tools are actually pretty darn good) to more sensibly-licensed stuff. But this cannot be done overnight and is therefore a gradual process.
> 
> Fonz
> 
> P.S. Reimplementing grep(1) probably requires an M.Sc (at least) in computer science, specialised in formal language and automaton theory (a.k.a. theoretical C.S.).



At the time of this thread I wasn't aware of the reimplementation. I also recall reading that a global regex library or engine was also being produced. I know that gcc and grep where the bigger tools used in base but also recall some others as well. I'm curious what else is left.


----------



## fonz (Jan 28, 2012)

UNIXgod said:
			
		

> I know that gcc and grep where the bigger tools used in base but also recall some others as well. I'm curious what else is left.


I'd say Bison is a pretty big deal, too. Oddly enough, Flex is BSD/MIT licensed if I'm not mistaken.

Fonz (assuming that's base, I'm not sure about that actually)


----------

