Re: xcdroast does no longer work with wodim: Who to blame?

[Goswin von Brederlow <goswin-v-b@web.de>]

Russ Allbery <rra@debian.org> writes:

> Russell Coker <russell@coker.com.au> writes:
>
>> If libschilly met the criteria for being a System Library then it
>> probably have been packaged for use by other programs.  If you want to
>> make a case for including libschilly as a System Library then please
>> provide a list of some of the other programs which depend on it.
>
> It's also worth bearing in mind that, in the past, Debian has decided to
> not assume *any* library shipped with Debian is a System Library since the
> concept isn't particularly meaningful for a distribution maker that
> doesn't divide its software into the system and add-ons.  It's a somewhat
> ill-defined and murky area of the GPL and I think Debian is best served by
> steering entirely clear of it with the exception of not worrying about the
> fact that the kernel is under the GPL.

The linux kernel luckily has a specific excemption:

linux-source-2.6.26/COPYING:

   NOTE! This copyright does *not* cover user programs that use kernel
 services by normal system calls - this is merely considered normal use
 of the kernel, and does *not* fall under the heading of "derived work".

So the ball stops at the libc. That the libc calls syscalls does not
make anything a "derived work" of the kernel and the viral nature of
the GPL is halted there.

Debian can work completly without the system library special case.

> If Debian can't consider OpenSSL to be a System Library, and that was the
> decision that we were advised to make in the past, I can't imagine any
> circumstances that would allow libschilly to qualify.

MfG
        Goswin