| 1 |
On Fri, Jul 13, 2007 at 07:04:20AM +0200, Harald van Dijk wrote: |
| 2 |
> > >Correct, it does, just like it permits C applications with |
| 3 |
> > >GPL-incompatible licenses to link with GPL libraries, so long as this |
| 4 |
> > >linking is done by the end user and the application is not distributed |
| 5 |
> > >in its linked form. See for example the NVidia kernel module, or for a |
| 6 |
> > >somewhat different but similar example, cdrtools. |
| 7 |
> > |
| 8 |
> > Not true: |
| 9 |
> > |
| 10 |
> > cdrecord and "all-1" programs in cdrtrools are 100% CDDL. |
| 11 |
> > |
| 12 |
> > mkisofs is a GPL project that links to non-GPL libraries. |
| 13 |
> > This is something that is no problem with the GPLv2 as long as the |
| 14 |
> > libraries are not derived from or written for GPL code. |
| 15 |
> > |
| 16 |
> > As the libraries mkisofs links with are older than mkisofs or at |
| 17 |
> > least written independently and usage neutral, there is no problem |
| 18 |
> > even with binaray redistribution of mkisofs. |
| 19 |
> |
| 20 |
> http://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl-faq.html#GPLIncompatibleLibs |
| 21 |
> |
| 22 |
> Neither the FSF nor you hold the copyright to mkisofs, but still, I'll |
| 23 |
> take the FSF's own interpretation over yours. If others believe you're |
| 24 |
> right, that's their choice. |
| 25 |
|
| 26 |
Besides, as I recall, the decision for cdrkit was based on a |
| 27 |
disagreement over the build system license, not the license of |
| 28 |
libraries. Sorry, that's what I should've said, and that's all I |
| 29 |
should've said; the rest is not relevant here. |
| 30 |
-- |
| 31 |
gentoo-dev@g.o mailing list |
Archives