Re: Debian i386 freeze
after not having acess to e-mail all weekend (ISP problems) and trying to
catch up....
On Fri, Jul 17, 1998 at 09:21:23PM +0100, Philip Hands wrote:
> > > At the moment the copyright file says all of the package is covered by the
> > > GPL, whereas this is not in fact, since you certainly could not rebuild it
> > > without access to the Qt stuff, which conflicts with the GPL.
> >
> > I understand your point, but I don't agree with it. We know that the source
> > code is okay to distribute, so we only have to talk about the binary and
> > not worry about rebuilding it.
>
> Hm. Not convinced.
>
> The GPL is being applied to the binary, and thereby confers the right on those
> that receive the binaries to a) obtain full source upon request, and b) use
> that source to produce and distribute modified or derived programs.
>
> This is a right that isn't ours to give.
Ok this seems to be my major problem with this discussion...
I personally don't see the problem...because KDE itself is GPL...qt is
not.
My question is this: can I wrire a progeam for Windows and GPL it?
I can GPL my code...but it needs to be linked against proprietary libraries..
I certainly can't garauntee the source to M$ or Borland library
sources...
I don't see how this is any different? Should we be warning the
people who port Moonlight Creator to Windows that they may be
breaking M$ or Borlands licence by distributing their binaries?
As far as I understand it...the program does not contain any actualy qt code...
it is just linked against the library. It simply contains calls to qt code.
anyone assuming that because a program is under one licence then
the libraries it interfaces are also under that license.
-Steve
--
/* -- Stephen Carpenter <sjc@delphi.com> --- <sjc@debian.org>------------ */
E-mail "Bumper Stickers":
"A FREE America or a Drug-Free America: You can't have both!"
"honk if you Love Linux"
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-request@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
Reply to: