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

Re: Meaning of `source code'

Richard Braakman wrote:
  >However, the DFSG does not contain anything like the "The source code
  >for a work means the preferred form of the work for making
  >modifications to it".
  >I think it should, to make clear that things like compiler output
  >are not source even though they might not be binary either.
  >(An actual example of this was the smalleiffel package, though I haven't
  >looked at it recently).
That is still the case.  To be precise, the smalleiffel compiler is itself
written in Eiffel, but the upstream package only provides the C code 
generated by the Eiffel compiler when compiling itself.  It is possible
to build the package using only free software; it is _possible_ but not
practicable to change the compiler and tools by editing the C code.

To compound the confusion, the developers have put it under the GPL!

Should I move it to non-free?

Oliver Elphick                                Oliver.Elphick@lfix.co.uk
Isle of Wight                                  http://lfix.co.uk/oliver

PGP key from public servers; key ID 32B8FAA1

TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word "unsubscribe" to
debian-devel-request@lists.debian.org . 
Trouble?  e-mail to templin@bucknell.edu .

Reply to: