Messages in this thread |  | | | Date | Sun, 12 Jul 1998 14:21:47 -0700 | | From | George <> | | Subject | Re: Linus Speaks About KDE-Bashing |
| |
On Sun, Jul 12, 1998 at 12:26:42PM -0700, Tim Smith wrote: > At 04:40 PM 7/12/98 +0100, Alan Cox wrote: > >> FSF thinks that Motif is part of the Unix operating system, and so linking > >> against Motif libraries is fine. > > > >No it doesnt. The FSF thinks that Motif comes in the base distribution of > >some Unix OS's. > > I fail to see the distinction. Here is the wording from the GPL: > > "However, as a special exception, the source code distributed need not > include anything that is normally distributed (in either source or binary > form) with the major components (compiler, kernel, and so on) of the > operating system on which the executable runs, unless that component itself > accompanies the executable."
I think the issue here is that Motif has been the standrad GUI for just about any unix for the past few years ... basically it was just about impossible to properly install a system without it ... if you consider a gui a part of the system this was something that was ALWAYS distributed as part of the unix gui, the same CAN'T be said for Qt which has never been a snadard, and is distributed with a very small fraction of linux distributions as an optional component ...
plust the point is not if KDE can use Qt ... but if KDE can take other GPLed code and port it to Qt and release it ... we would have the same problem with motif I'd think, had it not been for lesstif ... though motif is more accepted as "part of a system" just because it is part of just about any commercial unix (as in integral part, not an option)
> >> At least one major Linux distribution includes Qt as part of the system, > > > >That isnt a base distribution. The kernel too comes in the base > >distribution btw so we can all go make nonfree variants right ? > > Suppose that the Motif exception applied to Qt. Please explain how this > would allow me to make a nonfree variant of the Linux kernel.
imagine someone writing a "library" that takes care of a lot of things the kernel does and makes that code non-free ... then he makes linux kernel use those routines ... he distributes this on BlaBla Linux distribution thus becoming a standard ...
basically that would link non-free code directly into the kernel .... not as a module ... I doubt anybody would consider that ok ...
George
-- ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ George Lebl <jirka@5z.com> http://www.5z.com/jirka/ ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ The following implements RSA in perl and is illegal to export from the US: #!/bin/perl -sp0777i<X+d*lMLa^*lN%0]dsXx++lMlN/dsM0<j]dsj $/=unpack('H*',$_);$_=`echo 16dio\U$k"SK$/SM$n\EsN0p[lN*1 lK[d2%Sa2/d0$^Ixp"|dc`;s/\W//g;$_=pack('H*',/((..)*)$/) - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu Please read the FAQ at http://www.altern.org/andrebalsa/doc/lkml-faq.html
|  |