Re: linking to GPL'd libraries WAS Re: One unclear point in the Vim license
On Thu, Jan 03, 2002 at 10:43:48PM -0800, Thomas Bushnell, BSG wrote:
> email@example.com (Thomas Bushnell, BSG) writes:
> > Yes, it is different. One is a program making callouts to a different
> > entity, the kernel. The case we were talking about is that of library
> > linking.
> I should add here that it is relevant that the callouts to the kernel
> are callouts to an interface which is defined as "not making things a
> combined derived work", which is not normally the case for a library.
> It is relevant and important here that the authors of the kernel
> intend that understanding of those callouts.
What is the definition of a "callout"?
Why is it so different to a published library function?
Apart from convenience of argument, that is.
You dismissed my Tcl example without comment but I don't see how
it is different to the kernel case. A non-free program running
in the Tcl interpreter can have the Tcl interpreter load a GPLed
library such as libreadline. The non-free program is not
linked to the library. So why is this illegal?
Hamish Moffatt VK3SB <firstname.lastname@example.org> <email@example.com>