[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: Corel's apt frontend

On Wed, Nov 03, 1999 at 07:00:10PM +0100, Henning Makholm wrote:
> uh01hllg@umail.furryterror.org (Zygo Blaxell) writes:
> > Does this mean that as long as a developer writes their own headers, they
> > can link anything they want to against a GPLed .so file without infringing
> > on the GPL?  
> I don't see any way the copyright on .so could affect programs that
> link against it, if compiled with clean-room headers (which may need
> to include a dummy .so that the linker can inspect while creating
> the executable).

I don't see how you could write your own headers without copying the
existing ones, personally. (It counts as copying if you get one person
to read it, and someone else writes it down, you don't have to be using
cp or anything. And personally, I can't see any way you could `reinvent'
a header file that wouldn't amount to doing exactly that :-/)


Anthony Towns <aj@humbug.org.au> <http://azure.humbug.org.au/~aj/>
I don't speak for anyone save myself. PGP encrypted mail preferred.

 ``The thing is: trying to be too generic is EVIL. It's stupid, it 
        results in slower code, and it results in more bugs.''
                                        -- Linus Torvalds

Attachment: pgp3gLnFxInEe.pgp
Description: PGP signature

Reply to: