| |||||||||||||
I think the "exception to the exception" is vagueI think the "exception to the exception" is vaguePosted Mar 22, 2011 8:40 UTC (Tue) by dark (subscriber, #8483)In reply to: I think the "exception to the exception" is vague by dbruce Parent article: Has Bionic stepped over the GPL line? I would say they all accompany each other, after all they're in the same directory tree and even next to each other in the pool/ directories. Also, if someone makes a Debian DVD then they all end up on the same disc. (Well, not all, because they won't fit, but being unable to put the application on DVD#1 will mean it's incompatible with the DFSG anyway.) As for the intent, this whole clause is there to allow GNU software to be used on proprietary systems, not the other way around. This was pretty important back when there were no free systems. I'd be hesitant to read it any other way. In fact, if glibc were intended to fall under that clause with no exceptions, you would get the weird situation that it would be allowed for an otherwise-free distribution to include a glibc binary without source. (LGPL v2.1, clause 6). I doubt that is the FSF's intent.
(Log in to post comments)
|
|||||||||||||