Re: cdrtools - GPL code with CDDL build system

[Måns Rullgård <mru@inprovide.com>]

"Bernhard R. Link" <brlink@debian.org> writes:

> * Mns Rullgrd <mru@inprovide.com> [060319 01:14]:
>> Don Armstrong <don@debian.org> writes:
>> > Not just linking; it's the creation of a derivative work of a GPLed
>> > work. Frankly, I don't see how you can argue that cdrecord is not a
>> > derivative work of the GPLed part of cdrecord and the build system.
>> 
>> I disagree.  The final executable is no more a derivative of the build
>> system than it is of the compiler.  After all, no parts of the
>> makefiles end up inside the executable.
>
> I think derivative or not is not the question here, but the GPL 
> explicitly demands that the build system is available under
> GPL-compatible changes.
>
> from Section 2 of the GPL:
> # b) You must cause any work that you distribute or publish, that in
> # whole or in part contains or is derived from the Program or any
> # part thereof, to be licensed as a whole at no charge to all third
> # parties under the terms of this License.
>
> from Section 3 of the GPLL:
>
> # Accompany it with the complete corresponding machine-readable
> # source code, which must be distributed under the terms of Sections
> # 1 and 2 above on a medium [...]
>
> # For an executable work, complete source
> # code means all the source code for all modules it contains, plus any
> # associated interface definition files, plus the scripts used to
> # control compilation and installation of the executable.
>
> "scripts used to control compilation" is clearly what we currently
> refer to as "build system".

Point taken.  The obvious solution is to replace the build system
with an acceptably licensed one.  While at it, one could also make it
work properly.  Incidentally, this is what the dvdrtools folks have
already done.

-- 
Måns Rullgård
mru@inprovide.com