Hello Andreas, Andreas Barth [2011-02-13 19:18 +0100]: > from. "derived from" happens already if the packages uses .h-files > from the gpl-library, runs the "link stage" again the so-files during > compilation etc.
So you think "linking" in the license sense just applies to the time when we build the package (and have the header files available), and not any more to the runtime stage when we execute the program? If that offers a legally acceptable workaround, I'm happy to apply it. :-) I'd still have a weird feeling about it, though, as the end result for the user is exactly the same.. > So, as we don't deliver binary packages that are derived from the > libreadline-code (as libreadline isn't part of the source environment > used during building packages), that's ok. So I don't understand why merely building against an API already makes a program a "derived work" of that API; it's merely using that API, after all? Anyway, thanks a lot for your input and suggestions here! Martin -- Martin Pitt | http://www.piware.de Ubuntu Developer (www.ubuntu.com) | Debian Developer (www.debian.org) -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
