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

Re: GPL vs LGPL, Was Bug#8676

On Sun, 13 Apr 1997 22:42:27 MDT Jason Gunthorpe (jgg@gpu.srv.ualberta
.ca) wrote:

> On Sat, 13 Apr 1996, Philippe Troin wrote:
> > > - Compilers and compiler tools have a modified GPL that exempts the above.
> > 
> > Wrong.
> > GPL states that output from programs are not considered derived work.
> > There is no modified GPL.
> > Bison used to be the exception because a bison-generated parser 
> > includes a large part of bison itself. But now, bison output doesn't 
> > have to be GPL'ed anymore.
> Ah! Thank you, the person I was talking to used bison as an example of
> that. I think I thought he ment all compiler type output.

Bison was the only exception of GPL program output I know of.
Well actually, they put it this way: the output was completely free of use, but you had to rewrite the libbison functions :-)
The FSF waived the restriction something like one year ago...


Reply to: