Messages in this thread |  | | Date | Sun, 3 Dec 2000 23:54:52 +0100 | From | Pavel Machek <> | Subject | Re: Fasttrak100 questions... |
| |
Hi!
> [Christopher Friesen] > > I think you should re-read the GPL. You only have to provide source > > to people to whome you have distributed your new binaries, and you > > only have to provide that source if you are asked for it. > > Oh, and you have to provide the complete text of the GPL as well, and > for that you do *not* have a "only if they ask for it" clause. > > Or so it seems to some people, like RMS. See this week's DWN: there is > a nice long discussion in debian-devel about this. Apparently RMS > demands that all GPL'd Debian binary packages include a copy -- it is > not enough that the Debian base system already has a copy and that all > GPL'd source tarballs include a copy. > > I do not agree with this interpretation, because it would mean that any > GPL'd file that can possibly be independently downloaded (such as a .c > file from a CVS server) must include that same 17k document. > > ...But just so everyone knows: according to RMS, every file on your FTP > server that you provide under the GPL v2 must include a copy of the > GPL. (Easy enough to do with tar files, harder for other formats, and > never mind the wasted bandwidth.) Having the GPL in a separate file on > your site does not count, apparently.
Hmm, add special code for GPL into gzip ;-). Pavel PS: That's crazy. Including it by reference should be enough. I do not want waste 17K on every file. -- I'm pavel@ucw.cz. "In my country we have almost anarchy and I don't care." Panos Katsaloulis describing me w.r.t. patents at discuss@linmodems.org - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
|  |