Re: GPL vs. Motif (was: MaintainerDatabase Copyright)
On Wed, Oct 08, 1997 at 08:56:00PM -0700, Bruce Perens wrote:
> It doesn't make any sense for you to distribute the source to Motif with
> your static-linked Motif executable, since the source to Motif is not
> available to you. I'm inclined to consider it an operating-system facility.
> I can take it up with RMS if you wish.
> Of course, people should use lesstif if at all possible. I see only a few
> -smotif programs in "stable":
> gimp (I think the one in unstable doesn't use motif at all).
> ddd (Already replaced by a lesstif version)
> Is this worse for unstable? Hopefully some of these can be built with
The latest (5.0 Beta) version of nedit works (almost) perfectly
with the latest version of lesstif. I have discussed the Debian Free
Software Guidelines with the author, and I talked him into changing the
license to be DFSG compliant (Wahoo!!!). Now he has to convince the Fermi
National Accelerator Laboratory Technology Transfer Office to go along with
the change. I don't plan on pulling out my old commercial Motif CD and
making any more statically linked versions so there will soon be just one
version of nedit. With luck it will go back into the main distribution as
completely free software.
Erik B. Andersen Web: http://www.inconnect.com/~andersen/
--This message was written using 73% post-consumer electrons--
TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word "unsubscribe" to
Trouble? e-mail to email@example.com .