Re: dpkg support for solaris-i386 architecture
The language in the GPL seems quite ambiguous; it could be argued that
this is really a violation of DFSG#9 (license must not contaminate) (I
wouldn't say it is), but it is ambiguous.
On 4/7/06, Russ Allbery <email@example.com> wrote:
> Andrew Donnellan <firstname.lastname@example.org> writes:
> > On 4/6/06, Steve Langasek <email@example.com> wrote:
> >> No. It says you may do this *if* you aren't shipping your GPLed
> >> binaries together with those libraries.
> > Hmmm. Would this include 'mere aggregation'?
> Russ Allbery (firstname.lastname@example.org) <http://www.eyrie.org/~eagle/>
> To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
> with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact
Jabber - email@example.com
Member of Linux Australia - http://linux.org.au
Debian user - http://debian.org
Get free rewards - http://ezyrewards.com/?id=23484
OpenNIC user - http://www.opennic.unrated.net