Re: GPL scripts with a GPL-incompatible interpreter
On Fri, Dec 13, 2002 at 02:00:27PM -0800, Walter Landry wrote:
> 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.
This sounds wrong to me, because the requirement to include source code
is only in section 3. And section 3 specifically says "distribute under
the terms of Sections 1 and 2", so it can't be more permissive than
those sections. In fact, it imposes an extra requirement.
If we go by your interpretation, then any self-contained GPL executable
(for example, a flash image for an embedded linux system) can be
distributed without source code.
I read section 3 as being an additional restriction on modifications
that are also "object code or executable form". The open question is
then whether an executable script is in "executable form".