Re: [GPL] No linking with proprietary programs: where?
On Tue, Mar 14, 2000 at 11:14:00PM +0100, Tomasz Wegrzanowski wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 14, 2000 at 10:48:44PM +0100, Marcus Brinkmann wrote:
> > On Tue, Mar 14, 2000 at 09:38:17PM +0100, Tomasz Wegrzanowski wrote:
> > > So why people tend to think that piping is ok, but using .so isn't ?
> > There is a quality difference between piping and any sort of linking.
> What is this subtle difference ?
> Oh, and remember shared memory, and other IPCs between
> linking and piping.
Piping is done by using both components in a bigger structure (the pipe is
added by the user, not something that is provided by either application).
Also, there is no advertised interface for piping. (a pipe is just a byte
However, note that the output of a program is usually subject to copyright
law, so a pipe is legal if the license for the output allows usage of it.
The GPL explicitely does not restrict usage.
> > > Or using proprietary kernel is ok, proprietary .so isn't ?
> > What do you mean with "using"?
> Calling functions that are not contained by your program.
> Is (asm:int) so different than (asm:call) for copyright purposes ?
I don't know what (asm:*) is. However, there is no difference between
calling kernel functions or library functions.
You are thinking very strange. What you think is not restricted is actually
subject to restrictions but allowed because the licenses explicitely allow
it. Piping is restricted, but allowed as "use" by all free software licenses
(if you don't bundle the application and distribute them as a whole).
Calling kernel functions is restricted, but allowed by the linux kernel
license (or the other way round, by the GPL in the exception clause).
`Rhubarb is no Egyptian god.' Debian http://www.debian.org Check Key server
Marcus Brinkmann GNU http://www.gnu.org for public PGP Key
Marcus.Brinkmann@ruhr-uni-bochum.de, firstname.lastname@example.org PGP Key ID 36E7CD09