Re: GPL-licensed packages with depend-chain to OpenSSL
Ken Arromdee <firstname.lastname@example.org> writes:
> On Sat, 4 Sep 2004, Andrew Suffield wrote:
>> I find a decent smoke test for aggregation to be:
>> Can I take these two packages on the same CD and split them apart
>> again, such that they are no longer aggregated, and still use them?
> This definition suggests that all Emacs macros are derived from Emacs, that
> all Perl scripts are derived from Perl, and of course that any document
> written in Microsoft Word is derived from Word.
No, it suggests that Emacs macros shipped with Emacs are a combined
work -- especially if the macros are shipped in Emacs' load-path.
Perl scripts shipped with perl are a combined work, just like C
programs shipped with libc are a combined work. This all is exactly
what the OS-exception is for -- so that runtime code libraries and
interpreters didn't get dragged around by the GPL too, unless you're
the OS vendor.
Debian is an OS vendor. Eit.
Oh, and Word? I don't think I'd call a Word Doc and MS Word a
combined work, or MS Word part of the Source, unless OO.o or AbiWord
really couldn't open it. There's a fuzzy line between interpreters
and rich document formats, but I think Word is mostly still on the
"document format" side of that line.
Brian Sniffen email@example.com