Re: The Curious Case Of The Mountainous Molehill (was Re: A new practical problem with invariant sections?)
On Mon, Feb 13, 2006 at 03:52:28PM -0700, Hubert Chan wrote:
> > On Mon, Feb 13, 2006 at 01:42:44PM -0700, Hubert Chan wrote:
> >> 3a only says that a binary has to be *accompanied* with the source
> >> code. Hence it can be on a separate medium. So you can distribute
> >> your 1KB chip, stapled to a CD-ROM that contains the source, and
> >> still comply with the terms of the GPL.
> > you can do the same with GFDL documents. e.g. the stupid coffee cup
> > example so popular with you zealots - if you can't fit the invariant
> > sections on the cup itself, then print it on paper and include it in
> > the box. "problem" solved.
> I was not discussing any problem with the GFDL. I was showing you that
> your reading of the GPL was incorrect. The GPL does not require you to
> stick the full source onto the same 1KB chip as the binary, as you
> claimed that it did.
neither does the GFDL, as you and your ilk repeatedly claim that it
to spell out the bleeding obvious: that was the point of my using the
GPL like that. to show that just as it's false for the GPL, it is also
false for the GFDL. i'm sorry that such "subtlety" was too difficult for
your literal/fundamentalist mind. i'll try to stick to words of very few
syllables in future.
> > the GFDL has a similar provision. you can provide a link to an
> > internet address containing the full document.
> Please show me where the GFDL has such a provision. The passage that
i've shown it before. i have no interest in playing your time-wasting
game. go read the archives.
craig sanders <firstname.lastname@example.org> (part time cyborg)