Re: GPL scripts with a GPL-incompatible interpreter
Steve Langasek <email@example.com> wrote:
> On Fri, Dec 13, 2002 at 11:35:57AM -0800, Walter Landry wrote:
> > > My concern is not with bindings (most PHP *bindings* seem to be
> > > GPL-compatible), but with the interpreter itself; I don't see anything in
> > > the GPL that states unequivocally that distributing a GPL script together
> > > with a GPL-incompatible interpreter is acceptable.
> > You seem to be worrying about distributing GPL'd applications under
> > section 3 of the GPL. But that is only for "object code or executable
> > form". Debian is distributing it under section 2. Furthermore, the
> > thing that Debian distributes doesn't have any parts of anything else
> > in it. This is different from compiled C code, which has parts of the
> > compiler, libc, and other libraries. So Debian doesn't have to worry
> > about compatibility.
> So you believe that we only need to comply with section 2 of the GPL in
> order to distribute these scripts, even though the script is an
> "executable form" per se? If this is sufficient, that's fine with me;
> I just don't see how it's invalid to say that a script, being both source
> and executable, must comply with both sections 2 and 3, not just section
> 2. Certainly it's *easier* to be able to ignore section 3, it just seems
> arbitrary to me.
Section 3 gives you rights in addition to section 2. Section 3 lets
you distribute a particular kind of modification that is not allowed
in Section 2 (a modification that incorporates things that can not be
licensed under the GPL). But Debian is not doing that, so there is no
need to resort to section 3.