Re: Can we pull KDE?
On Tue, Sep 08, 1998 at 07:52:06AM +0200, Michael Meskes wrote:
> On Mon, Sep 07, 1998 at 07:00:42PM -0400, Raul Miller wrote:
> > This borders on the truth. The current license is not DFSG, since
> > GPL+Qt explicitly disallows any distribution. Also, while we agreed
> > that a license which allows distribution could let KDE be distributed,
> > that hasn't happened yet, and doesn't begin to cover all the current
> > issues.
> Pardon me, but I haven't followed this discussion closely enough. Could
> anyone please tell me in two or three words why it is illegal to distribute
> KDE which is GPLed but linked to a non-free library, but not illegal to
> distribute an Emacs binary linked against (for instance) SUN's libc, which
> isn't free either.
The GPL specifically lets you link against standard system components,
free or non-free. That means free software can be linked with Sun's libc,
as well as with Motif etc on Solaris systems. It couldn't be linked with
Motif on a linux system because Motif is not standard on linux systems
(Debian at least).
Hamish Moffatt VK3TYD email@example.com, firstname.lastname@example.org
Latest Debian packages at ftp://ftp.rising.com.au/pub/hamish. PGP#EFA6B9D5
CCs of replies from mailing lists are welcome. http://hamish.home.ml.org