Re: FreeDOS and GPL-compatibility
On Wed, Jun 20, 2001 at 04:50:30PM -0400, Brett Smith wrote:
> Which is why the GPL leaves it up to the particular operating system in
> question. Note again: "the source code distributed need not include
> anything that is normally distributed... with the major components... of
> the operating system *on which the executable runs*." (Emphasis mine, of
> course.) As a compiler is not typically distributed with Windows, no
> compiler -- be it Borland, or gcc, or whatever -- falls under this
> exception for Windows programs.
But the clause also says that the compiler _is_ one of the major
components of the operating system. From the FSF's point of view,
it's obvious that something without a compiler is not an operating
system, because it can't compile any source to run :)
I think it was worded specifically this way when Sun unbundled its
compiler.
As you point out, it does say "on which the executable runs", which
makes me conclude that the compiler in question must be the one
the program was compiled with. (I'd also make a case that the
C library is a major component of the operating system, even if
it's not specifically listed here.)
However... this is not an ordinary executable. FreeDOS _is_ an
operating system! It doesn't run on anything else. So I think
the escape clause is unusable here.
--
Richard Braakman
Looking for a job writing free software.
See http://www.xs4all.nl/~dark/resume.html
Reply to: