🚀 go-pugleaf

mib@geech.gnu.ai.mit.edu (Michael I Bushnell) writes:
> In article <9L38eB21w164w@mantis.co.uk> mathew@mantis.co.uk (Lieutenant 030) 
>    So I can avoid the GPL so long as I distribute object files and get the
>    user to link them himself?
> 
> I just spoke with rms about this.
> 
> If the code is GPL, but not LGPL, then you cannot do quite as you
> want.  If they are distributed together (even if in multiple files)
> then what you distribute (which is the total program) must be
> distributed under the GPL, or in some other fashion approved by the
> FSF.

How do you define what "the total program" is?  Is a compiler which calls
gcc to do its actual compiling part of "the total program" which we call
"an environment for compiling C programs and running them"?

How about the NeXT OS and gcc?  Isn't the "total program" the entire OS,
which includes a GNU compiler?
  
> My earlier statement about "even if they are in the same program" was
> incorrect.  Depending on the degree to which your code is intertwined
> with FSF code, the total program may or may not be considered a "work
> based on" the FSF code.  There is a gray area involved, which gets
> decided by the judges.

I see.  So basically if I want to write a program which calls a GNU
program in any way, there's no way for me to know whether I'm "safe" unless
I hire expensive lawyers?

No wonder lots of companies won't touch GNU software with a ten foot pole.


mathew

-- 
Just another would-be Mac owner put off by Apple's monopolistic practices / If
you know where I can buy the CD "In Mysterious Ways" by John Foxx, please send
me email / Message for Kodak: Bring back Dan Bredy! / My PGP RSA public key is
available on request / Desperately seeking CD of "U2" by Negativland / 4 lines