Re: Double Standard?

[David Johnson <djohnson@acuson.com>]

Terry Dawson wrote:
> 
> David Johnson wrote:
> 
> > I didn't check for every GPL application that uses Qt, only one example
> > is sufficient. The package licq 0.44-4, in stable, uses the Qt library,
> > along with being licensed under the GPL. It does not have any additional
> > clauses at all. I looked. I didn't find any.
> 
> If that was the case for 0.44-4 it has certainly been corrected in
> current versions.
> There is a clearly stated exception in /usr/doc/licq/copyright for the
> licq-plugins-qt2 plugin.

Curiouser and Curiouser. I looked again and I couldn't find it. So I
looked harder. There it was, hidden in
./licq-0.75.3a/plugins/qt-gui-0.70.4/doc, four levels down.
 
My apologies to the list. I had always assumed that licq dynamically
linked to Qt, instead of the apparent runtime linking that RMS
specifically allows. I figured if main.cpp did not have an exception,
then neither did the rest of the program (that's where I would put it at
the minimum). But licq is apparently two programs, one of which has an
exception, and the other that does not but whose configure script links
the two.

I will now go and hang my head in shame.

David Johnson