Re: XFree86 license difficulties
On 3 Feb 2004, Henning Makholm wrote:
> > If that means what it appears to mean, how could the OS exemption have ever
> > been meant to be useful at all?
> It is meant to allow third-party distribution of binaries linked with
> the C libraries of proprietary Unices.
But if you link the binary with the C library of a proprietary Unix (and it's
not dynamic linking), you are distributing the component with the executable
(in fact, as part of the executable), so the exemption doesn't apply.
> > the OS exemption can only have any effect when you distribute the
> > component with the executable anyway.
> No, read it again. It says that you does *not* have to distribute the
> component or its source, even if is necessary to reproduce the binary
> you're distributing.
I still don't see it.
If the binary contains anything from the OS components, such as parts of
compiler libraries linked in, then you're distributing the component with
the executable, so you don't get the exemption.
It might apply if you're using a header file but not linking in any
libraries, but how often does that happen?
Reply to: