[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: TeX Licenses & teTeX (Was: Re: forwarded message from Jeff Licquia)

At 08.38 +0200 2002-08-11, Thomas Bushnell, BSG wrote:
>Lars Hellström  <Lars.Hellstrom@math.umu.se> writes:
>> However concerning the CM fonts I think you're wrong, since the conditions
>> for these are indeed very similar to those of the LPPL; it's just the case
>> that the LPPL relaxes these conditions in some cases. If you think a
>> "rename file before modification" rule is clearly DFSG-free then I'm glad,
>> but there are others that need to be convinced of that too.
>A key difference is that the CM fonts source need not be installed
>(tetex automatically runs METAFONT in some cases, but it could easily
>be pointed at different source names).
>Users use *.tfm files when running TeX, and the restrictions on *.mf
>names are not restrictions on *.tfm names.  That's a key fact.
>However, the LPPL restricts the actual filename the user normally
>uses, rather than a name that really appears only in the source.

You've got TeX mixed up with METAFONT in this argument. The *.mf files are
METAFONT programs, and their names are indeed what the METAFONT user
normally uses. When LPPL is applied to *.sty, *.cls, etc. files then it is
applied to TeX programs, and their names are what the TeX user normally
uses. It is true that one doesn't need cmr10.mf, but rather cmr10.tfm, to
run TeX, but one similarly does not need any part of LaTeX or PlainTeX to
dvips mpman.dvi, even though one probably would need that to TeX mpman.tex.

Lars Hellström

Reply to: