Re: XFree86 license difficulties
paul cannon <pik@debian.org> writes:
> As another example, a command line program could wrap the functionality
> of nearly all libraries. If someone didn't want to link a program with
> libcurl, one would simply invoke /usr/bin/curl and get much of the same
> functionality. Should these be different actions from a licensing
> standpoint?
>
> As always, let me know if I seem to be on crack.
You're not on crack -- but I don't think you're right either. There's
a series of fine distinctions here, and the true answer is murky
enough that Debian's right to take the conservative path.
You argue that a command line program should be no different from a
dynamically linked program. The FSF argues it the other way: that
dynamic linking should be treated no differently from static linking.
If it *is* different, then the GPL reduces to the LGPL, and the FSF's
bargaining chips in Readline and GMP go away.
It's interesting to look at how the FSF's position on this evolved
from "We need this to be the case" to "This is the case" -- check out
/usr/share/doc/clisp, for example. That was back when Stallman used
reason instead of dogma, though.
-Brian
--
Brian Sniffen bts@alum.mit.edu
Reply to: