Re: cdrtools
On Thursday 13 July 2006 18:54, Erast Benson wrote:
> On Thu, 2006-07-13 at 16:43 +0100, Roger Leigh wrote:
> > Erast Benson <erast@gnusolaris.org> writes:
> > > On Thu, 2006-07-13 at 12:59 +0100, Ian Jackson wrote:
> > >> Erast Benson writes ("Re: cdrtools"):
> > >> > Joerg clearly stands that:
> > >> >
> > >> > 1) Makefiles != scripts or at least it is unclear whether Makefiles
> > >> > may be called "scripts":
> > >> >
> > >> > """ GPL §3 requires the "scripts for compilation" to be provided but
> > >> > as a first note, it is unclear whether Makefiles may be called
> > >> > "scripts".
> > >>
> > >> This is an absurd interpretation. `The scripts used to control
> > >> compilation and installation of the executable' would be an empty set
> > >> for much GNU software if it didn't include the Makefiles. It is
> > >> obvious that that phrase was included in the GPL specifically to
> > >> ensure that the build system is covered.
> > >>
> > >> If it's not obvious to someone then that person is either
> > >> (a) dishonest or (b) astonishingly out of touch with reality.
> > >
> > > I don't want to insist on (1) too. But I must agree with Joerg that it
> > > is unclear if Makefiles could be called as "scripts for compilation".
> >
> > This is a minority viewpoint, IMO. We could argue for months about
> > what a "script" is, but that wouldn't help much. Makefiles are often
> > referred to as "build scripts", and I don't think many folks would
> > argue that they are *not* scripts.
>
> sure. and many would argue that it is not. I personally don't care much.
> Well, it is not really productive, and as I said, I don't want to insist
> on (1). So, for me, this topic is closed.
I'd rather expect some alternatives to cdrtools to be discussed in -devel ML,
because it is pretty insane to rely on a single point of failure like that
one (competition always makes things work better), and license issues
discussion to be moved to -legal or appropriate buglogs into BTS.
--
pub 4096R/0E4BD0AB 2003-03-18 <people.fccf.net/danchev/key pgp.mit.edu>
fingerprint 1AE7 7C66 0A26 5BFF DF22 5D55 1C57 0C89 0E4B D0AB
Reply to: