[Top][All Lists]

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

Re: [Lynx-dev] Re: GPL

From: Thorsten Glaser
Subject: Re: [Lynx-dev] Re: GPL
Date: Sat, 29 Jul 2006 22:11:36 +0000 (UTC)

David Woolley dixit:

>The FSF view is that dynamic linking should be treated
>like static

This is not the case if you link dynamically against a
"standard interface" / OS component. Besides, if static
and dynamic linking are to be treated equally, why can't
we treat BSD (comes with libssl by default) and Windows
also equally?

Finally: the FSF is not a copyright holder to lynx.
Their opinion should be heard but eventually do not matter.

>to achieve a sufficiently arm's length
>separation, other components should be self contained programs.

And OpenSSL is not self-contained exactly where?

>This is the sort of brinkmanship that commercial organisations trying
>to use GPL code without releasing their code try.

If you're talking about Linux kernel modules: if the modules are
not derived from the Linux kernel, like the nVidia drivers, and
they are distributed separetely ("mere aggregation" e.g. on the
Koroaa CD doesn't count) and only linked together at run-time,
everything is okay as long as the linked-together (i.e. after
an insmod) form is never distributed (which it isn't since it's
an in-memory kernel), everything is okay.

The analogy can be taken to lynx: if it's using dlopen() to
load either OpenSSL or an equivalent library, and the linked-
together form is never distributed, there's no problem.
(And why should dlopen() be treated not like dynamic linking?
Backreference to the first paragraph.)

>trying it on shows a disrespect for the licence.

What do you expect from the head developer of a BSD operating system?
Embracing and endorsing the GNU licences?

I'm just trying to open up your eyes. The FSF's opinion may be worth
something, and I respect these people, but I don't share their opinion,
and I know that some things they pretend are just not backed by their
(rather ancient) licences.

I believe no one can invent an algorithm. One just happens to hit upon it
when God enlightens him. Or only God invents algorithms, we merely copy them.
If you don't believe in God, just consider God as Nature if you won't deny
existence.              -- Coywolf Qi Hunt

reply via email to

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