Re: Debian based GNU/Solaris: pilot program
Michael Poole <email@example.com> writes:
> Thomas Bushnell BSG writes:
>> Michael Poole <firstname.lastname@example.org> writes:
>>> It is not clear to me that
>>> standard library header files qualify as "associated interface
>>> definition files".
>> Wrong. Library header files that you link against are exactly what it
> Then we will have to disagree on this point. When the restriction
> supposedly kicks in only by virtue of two pieces of software existing
> on the same disk, and would not apply to separate distribution, I
> have to think the "mere aggregation" clause dominates. The other
> interpretation violates DFSG#9.
No, that's not right. You are thinking of this as a derived work
case, and it's not. There is no claim here about derived works.
I can say "you may distribute my binary if you pay me $100". I can
say "you may distribute my binary but only if you pay John $100". I
can say "you may distribute my binary, but only if you never eat
artichokes again." I can say, "you may distribute my binary only if
you distribute yours too."