Re: OpenMotif in Woody
On 6.XI.200 at 7,43 Sam TH wrote:
> On Wed, Dec 06, 2000 at 02:19:01PM +0100, Peter Makholm wrote:
> > Sam TH <sam@uchicago.edu> writes:
> >
> > > > It can't be DFSG compliant if they have a "Free OS's only" clause.
> > >
> > > That was my entire point. If you run a Free OS, then it acts like a
> > > DFSG compilant license (I think, it's based on the IBM Public License,
> >
> > No, bacause DFSG don't allow such premisses. Therefore it's not even
> > DSFG compliant on a DFSG compliant operation system.
>
> I said "acts like a DFSG compilant license", not "is DFSG compiant".
> I know perfectly well it isn't DFSG compiant.
Why do you think the clause "only free OS's" is not DFSG compliant?
There are many free OS's, not only Debian.
The GPL contains the following clause:
> However, as a
> special exception, the source code distributed need not include
> anything that is normally distributed (in either source or binary
> form) with the major components (compiler, kernel, and so on) of the
> operating system on which the executable runs, unless that component
> itself accompanies the executable.
A free copyleft license without such "special exception" will be free,
or not? GPL says "free libraries only", "free OS's only" seams to me
similar.
Anton Zinoviev, <zinoviev@debian.org>
Reply to: