🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <GUMBY.89Dec18204105@Gang-of-Four.Stanford.EDU> gumby@Gang-of-Four.Stanford.EDU (David Vinayak Wallace) writes:
|
|The copyleft says "distribute" not sell.  You can sell copylefted
|code.  You just can't enjoin the recipient from redistributing it.

the way I read it, it says if I write an original work that includes
copylefted code (such as gnu C runtime libraries), I can't sell it.
If I add to an existing thing, I can, but can't charge extra for anything
related to the copylefted stuff. So, that means a new work done with
GNU C would allow me only to charge for copying & distribution.

Did I misread something? I'd truly love to find out I did.

|Anyway, how often do you "link to the compiler?"  If you change the

DUH. Almost as good as a spelling flame. So I link to the runtime
library. So I use calls in there. Go figure.

|compiler, I'm glad that change may be redistributed!  Merely compiling
|your code with the compiler does not bring it under the copyleft.

See above. Linking to the runtime seems to bind me (sic) to the
copyleft. What did I miss?

|   I choose to make my living writing software. Everything I see from Mr.
|   Stallman's published writings & interviews (1) says he thinks that makes
|   me a jackass, or a thief...
|
|RMS makes his living writing software.  He does not say that you
|shouldn't  -- in fact he encourages it.

A nearly quote (from Byte?) "anybody who wants to make a lot of money
writing software is a stupid jackass". Something close to this I have
seen posted to the net, and quoted in a paper (magazine). Now maybe his
idea of a lot of money is a lot more than I hope to make, but the idea
I got from what I saw was that since software should be a "labor of
love", I shouldn't expect to make much at all from it.

-Miles