Re: Licensing, was elvis package
>>>>> On Sun, 26 Apr 1998 09:52:32 +0300 (IDT), Shaya Potter <spotter@kby.netmedia.net.il> said:
>> My main point was this: if the GPL has this clause about the
>> components of a program being free, what with the large quantity
>> of programs being Qtized, why haven't we seen any action?
Shaya> Probably because it's allowed, doesn't the FSF distribute
Shaya> emacs linked or with the ability to link out of the box
Shaya> against Motif?
Motif (and other 'normally distributed' libraries) on a system are an
exception to this rule else no glped program could be linked on a
system that uses it's standard libc (not gpled of course). Motif is
considered a standard part of many Unix installations, so linking with
Motif in that case is perfectly OK. (though of dubious legality on a
Linux installation actually (since Linux does not distribute Motif as
a standard part of the OS)).
Qt, however, is _not_ a standard part of any Unix installation (except
maybe a couple of Linux ones? SuSE?), so it doesn't fall under the
'normally distributed' clause (quoted below for fun).
----------------------------------------------------------------------
The source code for a work means the preferred form of the work for
making modifications to it. For an executable work, complete source
code means all the source code for all modules it contains, plus any
associated interface definition files, plus the scripts used to
control compilation and installation of the executable. However, as a
special exception, the source code distributed need not include
anything that is normally distributed (in either source or binary
form) with the major components (compiler, kernel, and so on) of the
operating system on which the executable runs, unless that component
itself accompanies the executable.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
The however part here is the important one.
As to why we haven't seen any action: I'd bet none of the programs
being Qtized are owned by the FSF and the authors haven't been
informed for the programs (or they don't have a problem with it).
Dres
--
@James LewisMoss <dres@dimensional.com> | Blessed Be!
@ http://www.dimensional.com/~dres | Linux is kewl!
@"Argue for your limitations and sure enough, they're yours." Bach
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-request@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
Reply to: