Re: On interpreting licences (was: KDE not in Debian?)
Marcus Brinkmann wrote:
> On Tue, Feb 08, 2000 at 09:14:55PM -0500, Andreas Pour wrote:
> > >
> > > (*) The source code must be complete.
> >
> > Right, but for the analysis to be complete you must include the definition of what
> > the complete source code is. This is provided in the second sentence of the
> > ultimate para. in Section 3, which provides
> >
> > For an executable work, complete source code means all the
> > source code for all modules it *contains*, plus any associated
> > interface definition files, plus the scripts used to control
> > compilation and installation of the executable.
> >
> > The key part being the reference to "all modules it *contains*", rather than all
> > modules which may at run-time be linked to it. To substantiate the point, I again
> > refer to my Webster's New Universal Unabridged Dictionary (2d ed. 1983) and look-up
> > "contain", quoting the relevant definitions:
> >
> > (1) to have in it; hold; enclose or include.
> ^^^^^^^
>
> What about the Qt header files, which are included at compile time?
Right. And those are distributed in source form.
I think you are taking this debate a bit out of context. Raul is trying to convince me
why a statically linked kghostview is not OK but a statically linked ghostview on
Solaris is. What you seem to be addressing here is the question of whether a KDE/Qt
binary can satisfy the GPL at all, which was a whole other debate.
To bring the point home, it is also true that proprietary libc header files are
"enclosed" in a Solaris ghostview (or pick another GPL'd/proprietary libc program).
> > (2) to have the capacity for holding.
>
> (I am not sure if I get all details of the english language correct,
> but the kde exectuable has the capacity to "hold" the qt libs).
I don't think you got this right -- this doesn't mean the theoretical capacity but the
actual. Otherwise you could say "the sun contains Andreas" since theoretically it can,
but that would not generally be considered a correct statement.
Ciao,
Andreas
Reply to: