Re: [PROPOSAL] Full text of GPL must be included
On Sat, 2 Dec 2000, Chris Waters wrote:
> Heck, I just duplicated Manoj's feat of downloading the 'ls' binary
> from the FSF's own site at ftp.gnu.org, and I can't help but notice
> that not only does the binary not contain the GPL (I ran strings to
> check), but there isn't even a copy of the GPL in that directory at
> all! I downloaded it and RAN it, and was given no indication at all
> of what my rights were! The only evidence I have that I didn't just
> break the law is the fact that "./ls --help" prints "Report bugs to
> fileutils-bugs@gnu.ai.mit.edu". Which requires some inference on my
> part....
I posted on this earlier. it's in there, but gnu has a creative answer to
this problem:
xanielle:/bin% strings ls | grep -A1 copying
This is free software; see the source for copying conditions. There is NO
warranty; not even for MERCHANTABILITY or FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR
PURPOSE.
According the the FSF, saying "look in the source" is a perfectly okay
answer. So not only do they NOT mention the GPL, but they don't even
mention where to get the damned source itself, just to reference it. and
this is in /bin/ls, for crying out loud. And it's like that on EVERY
GNU/Linux system.
/---------------------------------------------------------------\
< <"What Am I Doing? I'm Quietly Judging You." --Frank TJ Mackey> >
< <Rando Christensen / An illuzion worth believing> >
< <illuzionz@xanthor.net> <eyez@xanthor.net> <eyez@fragments.net> >
\-----------------------------------------------------------------------/
Reply to: