Re: xcdroast does no longer work with wodim: Who to blame?
Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de (Joerg Schilling) writes:
> Goswin von Brederlow <goswin-v-b@web.de> wrote:
>
>> Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de (Joerg Schilling) writes:
>>
>> > As said, license compatibility needs to be discussed separately. If you like
>> > to allow to publish binaries from GPLd programs for _any_ OS that does not
>> > come with a GPLd "libc", you need to allow (*) to link _any_ GPLd program
>> > against _any_ library that is not part of "the work" of the GPLd program. The
>> > rules of the GPL end at "work" limit and neither libc nor libschily or libscg
>> > are part of the "work" mkisofs. For this reason, there is no problem with the
>> > fact that mkisofs links against libschily and libscg.
>>
>> No we don't. We can just keep releasing Debian GNU/Linux which has a
>> GPLed "libc". It is not our problem nor our concern if Schilli OS
>> does not. Debian is legally only concerned with "Debian OS" and not
>> "_any_ OS".
>
> You are uninformed: libc on Linux is under LGPL and the LGPL is as "incompatible"
> to GPL as the CDDL is "incomparible" to the GPL.
>
> Jörg
Sorry, should have said:
No we don't. We can just keep releasing Debian GNU/Linux which has a
LGPLed "libc". It is not our problem nor our concern if Schilli OS
does not. Debian is legally only concerned with "Debian OS" and not
"_any_ OS".
And the LGPL is by design clearly GPL compatible. Even if you could
find some fault in that the intention of the license is clearly to
allow GPL and non GPL programs to link to an LGPL library and any such
bug would get clarified by the FSF. Any such faults please bring to
the attention of the FSF for further clarification. Don't bother us
with it.
MfG
Goswin
Reply to: