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

Re: The draft Position statement on the GFDL

Scripsit Raul Miller <moth@debian.org>

> This is the first post I've received from you that contains the word
> "step".

My exact words were:

| I really don't see where you are getting at. Can you explain in little
| words and with lots of intermediate results why you think that a GCC
| modified for you hypothetical environment would be non-distributable?

Congratulations for observing that I used the phrase "intermediate
results" rather than "steps".

> The system in question is totally proprietary with special hardware and
> software enforcement mechanisms:

[lots of fascist steps snipped]

> How do you modify gcc to support this micropayment functionality while
> complying with the GPL?

I don't know. However, if you somehow manage to make a functional
modification of gcc such that it runs on the system *and* you
distribute your modified gcc with full source and under the terms of
the GPL, then you will have no legal trouble with the FSF.

If somebody *else* (or your lack of access to applicable hardware, or
plain old lack of time, skill, and interest) prevents you from making
a functional modification and distributing the modified GCC with full
source under the terms of the GPL ... well, then that is not really
the fault of the GPL itself, and it makes no sense to claim that such
a scenario describes a functional modification that the GPL disallows.

Henning Makholm                    "They want to be natural, the anti-social
                                 little beasts. They just don't realize that
                         everyone's good depends on everyone's cooperation."

Reply to: