On Sat, Oct 10, 1998 at 03:04:15AM -0300, Nicolás Lichtmaier wrote:
>
> Besides, what if I create a binary that links to a non-existant library. I
> build the ELF structures by hand (?). Could you distribute a binary
> version of this non-working software? Of course you could!
> Then someone creates the library, and it fits perfectly with the package.
> The new library is no GPL'ed. You aren't allowed to distribute my package
> any more?
That depends upon whether the binary made use of the new library's
header files. It's the header files (which do get included into the
code), not the library, which have become the problem. This got
hashed out on this list some months ago. The consensus was that you
could in fact write stub headers so that the program would compile and
then link it dynamically to a non-free library later (i.e. by telling
people to create a symlink from libfoo to libbar), but although this
got you clear of the letter of the GPL, it obviously violated the
spirit and is a dirty trick with which Debian obviously will not
involve itself.
Raul takes this one step further and argues that even the source
can't be distributed when it's obvious that the only way to get a
functioning binary from it is to link it to something non-free. I
think he's way off the mark on that one, but at this point I think
we're just agreeing to disagree on that topic.
===========================================================================
Zed Pobre <zed@va.debian.org> | PGP key on servers, fingerprint on finger
===========================================================================
Attachment:
pgp57kmb7nYHv.pgp
Description: PGP signature