[Top][All Lists]

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

Re: Fwd: [gNewSense-users] gNewsense: CDRTOOLS- gNS bug 108

From: Markus Laire
Subject: Re: Fwd: [gNewSense-users] gNewsense: CDRTOOLS- gNS bug 108
Date: Mon, 19 Nov 2007 13:25:57 +0200
User-agent: Thunderbird (X11/20071031)

Kevin Dean wrote:
---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Joerg Schilling <address@hidden>
Date: Nov 14, 2007 12:06 PM
Subject: Re: [gNewSense-users] gNewsense: CDRTOOLS- gNS bug 108
To: address@hidden

"Kevin Dean" <address@hidden> wrote:
appears that the mkisofs utility is still licensed under the GPL
(presumably because it's not all your code?) but pulls code from
libscg (which is). It appears to me that this violates the terms of
both licenses if someone wants to distribute a binary. It appears as

It does not violate any of the licenses.

The CDDL allows a combination with any other license and the GPL
does not prevent a GPL project from using non-GPL code.

I'm quite sure that FSF doesn't share this opinion.

Also, Debian-Legal's opinion (IIRC) is that Joerg Shilling should NOT be trusted when it comes to interpreting the GNU GPL.

So I'd recommend to double-check from FSF every claim of Joerg Shilling before trusting of them in gNewSense.

In your understanding, is this what happens? Does mkisofs in fact
combine GPL and CDDL code?

No, mkisofs is a 100% GPL "work" that uses non-GPL libraries which
is permitted by the GPL. It is OK because this way no derived work
_from_ the GPL code is created.

I'm quite sure that FSF doesn't share this opinion either.

If this IS the case, what is the preferred way around this?

There is no need to work around it as there is no problem. The
distributions that asked their lawyers for checking the license
don't see any problem.

I doubt this.

Markus Laire

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]