From: Mike McCarty (jmccarty_at_ssd.usa.alcatel.com)
Date: 2002-04-02 18:50:13
On Tue, 2 Apr 2002, Adam Dunkels wrote:
> On Tuesday 02 April 2002 14.23, you wrote:
> > On Tue, Apr 02, 2002 at 02:00:32PM +0200, Adam Dunkels wrote:
[snip]
> I knew I had read about this somewhere, and it turns out that it was in the
> GPL FAQ:
> http://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl-faq.html#GPLModuleLicense
[snip]
Yes. This specifically states that if the module is linked with other
modules which are GPL, then Uz would have to GPL his stuff.
> > I've read the GPL several times in the last few days and found no such
> > wording. It has exceptions in case of "major parts of the operating system
> > you are using", but I think we agree that this does not cover cc65 and it's
> > library.
>
> Yes, that's the exceptions I was refering to. I guess it doesn't really apply
> in the cc65 case, because cc65 couldn't be constedered an operating system.
> But it doesn't really matter because the cc65 library code is freely
> redistributable, and thus compatiable with the GPL.
All that really means is that the FSF won't complain. It isn't the FSF
that would complain, it's Uz who is complaining. He doesn't want to GPL
his stuff.
> The FAQ mentions this as well:
> http://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl-faq.html#WindowsRuntimeAndGPL
Dynamic linking seems irrelevant.
Mike
--
char *p="char *p=%c%s%c;main(){printf(p,34,p,34);}";main(){printf(p,34,p,34);}
This message made from 100% recycled bits.
I can explain it for you, but I can't understand it for you.
I don't speak for Alcatel <- They make me say that.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe from the list send mail to majordomo_at_musoftware.de with
the string "unsubscribe cc65" in the body(!) of the mail.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.3 : 2002-04-02 18:50:26 CEST