[Top][All Lists]

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

bug#57399: etiquette / GPL question

From: Paul Eggert
Subject: bug#57399: etiquette / GPL question
Date: Thu, 25 Aug 2022 10:21:09 -0500
User-agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:91.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/91.11.0

On 8/24/22 22:55, Terence Kelly wrote:
(Plan Zero)  Write a little shell script that (a) downloads the grep-3.7 tarball, (b) unpacks it, (c) applies a small patch to a single .c source file, which adds roughly ten new lines of code, (d) builds the grep executable by calling ./configure, make, and make check, (e) applies my stand-alone general-purpose Munger tool to the grep executable, and (f) runs the resulting "munged" executable to show how my Munger tool changes the behavior of grep.

I'm happy to apply GPL to the script described above.  My reading of GPL is that a stand-alone general-purpose tool like my Munger need not be GPL'd merely because it touches the grep executable. (I might apply a GNU license such as Affero to the Munger tool anyway; I haven't decided yet.)

I'd also be happy to arrange for the patch applied in step (c) above to insert a notice that the affected .c source file has been modified.

This all sounds good. One little thing: the step (3) notice must contain a relevant date, as per GPL section 5(a).

Thanks for asking about this.

reply via email to

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