On 05/04/12 13:16, Leandro Lucarella wrote:
Joseph Rushton Wakeling, el 4 de abril a las 15:43 me escribiste:
To see why it matters, imagine a corporate entity releasing a large,
complex piece of software where the code was under a free licence
but the build system was proprietary and internal to the company.
It'd be a major block to practically enjoying the licence freedoms.
This is new to GPLv3 right? Because several companies are already doing
this, specially companies selling small devices with Linux, usually they
No, it's also in GPLv2, but in Section 3, with slightly different language:
The source code for a work means the preferred form of the work for making
modifications to it. For an executable work, complete source code means all
the source code for all modules it contains, plus any associated interface
definition files, plus the scripts used to control compilation and
installation of the executable.
[... see https://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl-2.0.html ...]
