[Top][All Lists]

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

Re: [chicken-users] silex GPL-2 licensed?

From: Leonardo Valeri Manera
Subject: Re: [chicken-users] silex GPL-2 licensed?
Date: Wed, 19 Mar 2008 19:01:46 +0100

On 19/03/2008, John Cowan <address@hidden> wrote:
>  Correct.  The mere use of a GPLed program (like gcc) to transform text
>  does not infect the output text with the GPL, *unless* the program copies
>  substantial portions of itself into the output.  Bison does so, and for
>  years parser code created by Bison had to be GPLed, but then the FSF
>  changed the license on the parser skeleton so that this was no longer so.

Ok, so /binary/ programs that use silex in some way dont need to be
GPL'd because of that.

I take it that this means that silex is never a runtime dependency.


Does this mean distributing the c intermediates of an app along with
the chicken libraries (in c form) and eggs (again in c form) needed to
run it therefore has no need for silex either and can be distributed
under, for example, a BSD license?

I ask because as an eINIT developer, I have to keep track of our
ability to bundle all the necessary code to run our scheme subsystem -
for obvious reasons, an init system with /usr/lib dependencies is not
an ideal solution... in fact the ability to do this is one of the
reasons we're dropping guile in favor of chicken. And eINIT is


reply via email to

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