Craig Sanders <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > that's almost the exact opposite of what the GPL says. > > from clause 3 of the GPL:
I've read clause three, thank you. I'll upper-case the bit you must have missed: > 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. However, as a special exception, the source > code distributed need not include anything that is normally > distributed (in either source or binary form) with the major > components (compiler, kernel, and so on) of the operating system > on which the executable runs, UNLESS THAT COMPONENT ITSELF > ACCOMPANIES THE EXECUTABLE. > > the last sentence, from "However, as a special exception" is particularly > relevant here. It's clear that (e.g.) libc accompanies (e.g.) /bin/ls in Debian: They are both in main, and the package maintainer makes sure you get libc when you get /bin/ls. If you also think that libc is a "section of" (see section two) /bin/ls and so on, then the conclusion is clear: You're in contravention of the GPL as you read it. > read the GPL. think about it. read it again. think some more. repeat > until all is clear. Physician, heal thyself. --Arnt
