| 1 |
On Friday 01 September 2006 15:08, Diego 'Flameeyes' Pettenò wrote: |
| 2 |
> I'm the first to not like Schilling's ways, but... |
| 3 |
> |
| 4 |
> On Friday 01 September 2006 14:44, Carsten Lohrke wrote: |
| 5 |
> > building GPL software with CDDL licensed |
| 6 |
> > makefiles |
| 7 |
> |
| 8 |
> Can't see how this is pertinent, I can build BSD licensed software with |
| 9 |
> autoconf that is GPL, and use GCC to compile.. |
| 10 |
|
| 11 |
The build scripts are part of the source code. And as such must be licensed |
| 12 |
under the GPL. A system to create make files (such as autoconf) is not as |
| 13 |
such part of the work. Completely automatically generated makefiles do not |
| 14 |
qualify either as they do not fall under copyright law (they are not original |
| 15 |
works). It seems however that the makefiles included in the cdrtools package |
| 16 |
should fall under the GPL. |
| 17 |
|
| 18 |
This however does not mean necesarilly that Joerg Schilling violates the GPL |
| 19 |
as one cannot violate ones own copyright. If there is code that is not his |
| 20 |
however, he would violate the GPL. |
| 21 |
> |
| 22 |
> > as well as linking mkisofs to libscg, which he relicensed to CDDL |
| 23 |
> > lately. |
| 24 |
> |
| 25 |
> This is a bit more debatable, he *can* link it, if he can change mkisofs |
| 26 |
> license to allow linking to non-GPL-compatible code. |
| 27 |
> Of that, I'm not sure tho. |
| 28 |
|
| 29 |
The GPL sucks in linking respect. Given the GPL however linking GPL-ed |
| 30 |
software to non-system libraries that are not GPL licensed (Not even LGPL) is |
| 31 |
a violation of the GPL. The GPL is very vague on the subject though. |
| 32 |
|
| 33 |
Paul |
| 34 |
|
| 35 |
-- |
| 36 |
Paul de Vrieze |
| 37 |
Gentoo Developer |
| 38 |
Mail: pauldv@g.o |
| 39 |
Homepage: http://www.devrieze.net |
Archives