🚀 go-pugleaf

abraham@iesd.auc.dk (Per Abrahamsen) writes:
> No, it is not news to you.  Read your question again.  Given the two
> source files
> 
> 	gnu.c		(under GPL)
> 	mathew.c	(written by you)
> 
> You can decide how to distribute (or not distribute) `mathew.c', even
> if some function in `mathew.c' do call a function defined in `gnu.c'.
> 
> However, if you campile a binary `a.out' from the two source files
> `gnu.c' and `mathew.c', then a.out will clearly be a derivative of
> both files.  Thus, if you distribute a.out (a derivative of `gnu.c')
> then you must also be willing to distribute the full source for
> `a.out', i.e. both `gnu.c' and `mathew.c'.

But if I distribute gnu.o and mathew.o and get the user to link his own
a.out, I don't have to distribute full source to mathew.c under the GPL?

So I can avoid the GPL so long as I distribute object files and get the
user to link them himself?


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