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

Re: Uploaded mirror 2.9-13slink15 (source all) to master

On 17 Jan 2000, Henning Makholm wrote:

> Scripsit Santiago Vila <sanvila@unex.es>
> > On Sun, 16 Jan 2000, Brian Ristuccia wrote:
> > > If the software has a patch clause, we require that modified
> > > binaries can be distributed. But this particular package doesn't
> > > have any binaries because it's a perl script.
> > Strange. Do you mean this package has not a .deb?
> No, he means that the word "binaries" usually means files which
> contain machine code. As such, the *letter* of the DFSG does not
> apply to perl source that goes into the .deb.

Yes, I know he means perl is a interpreted language. However, this
does not mean there is no binary, it just means source and binary
are identical, which is a very different thing.

We have to interpret source and binary in the Debian sense: In Debian,
binaries (as opposed to source) means whatever contains the .deb
binary package (as opposed to Debian source packages).

> However, the clear *intention* of the DFSG must have been that the
> license must allow shipping the files that go into the .deb in
> modified form, whether or not they contain machine code.

If this is the intention of the DFSG then it should be the way we
interpret it, so that following the letter and the spirit of it are the
same thing.


 "f520b8ff5f8a2fa2f9cfde2c58366d33" (a truly random sig)

Reply to: