[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: User's thoughts about LPPL



On Sun, Jul 21, 2002 at 01:29:36AM +0200, Frank Mittelbach wrote:
> Thomas Bushnell, BSG writes:

>  > Indeed, I can do two things:

>  > Make a derivate work of latex, which is variant, and called
>  > "special-non-latex".  

>  > Make a package with no derivatives of latex at all, which contains a
>  > single symlink: 'latex -> special-non-latex'.

>  > Happy with that?

> yes.

> for the kernel it is a bit tricky, but for packages under LPPL (and the
> majority of software which was put by their authors under LPPL) it is not a
> problem.

> the moment somebody has a document that loads your fudged package into LaTeX ,
> LaTeX will detect that you are trying to sail under a stolen flag and that is
> the whole purpose. 

Are you using the word 'package' here in the same sense as Thomas?
AIUI, Thomas is referring to creating a Debian package -- not a TeX
package -- that is called 'latex' and which provides a mechanism (a
symlink or an execve hack) for directly invoking his
modified-and-renamed version of LaTeX by the original name.  Would LaTeX
really be able to detect this subterfuge?

Steve Langasek
postmodern programmer

Attachment: pgp8YFXp_u3nD.pgp
Description: PGP signature


Reply to: