On Fri, Dec 29, 2000 at 07:15:05PM -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
> Alfred Perlstein <bright(at)wintelcom(dot)net> writes:
> > Rasmus Lerdorf warned one of you guys that simply linking to GNU
> > readline can contaminate code with the GPL.
> > Readline isn't LGPL which permits linking without lincense issues,
> > it is GPL which means that if you link to it, you must be GPL as
> > well.
> I do not believe that. In fact, I'll go further and say "Horsepucky!"
> The GPL applies to works that "contain or are derived from" a GPL'd
> program. Linking to a separately distributed library does not cause
> psql either to contain or to be derived from libreadline.
RMS already made a big stink about this, claiming that BeOS's use
of an emulation layer to link to some GPL'ed network drivers was enough
to force the GPL'ing of the kernel. Be backed down (and re-licensed
the code from the source, IIRC). Sun recently released a "driver
porting kit" that allowed similar drivers to be used in Solaris. There
was some outcry on Slashdot, but I'm not sure how it ended up.
I wouldn't mind having someone tell RMS to fuck off, though.
Adam Haberlach |A cat spends her life conflicted between a
adam(at)newsnipple(dot)com |deep, passionate, and profound desire for
http://www.newsnipple.com |fish and an equally deep, passionate, and
'88 EX500 |profound desire to avoid getting wet.
In response to
pgsql-hackers by date
|Next:||From: The Hermit Hacker||Date: 2000-12-30 01:39:51|
|Subject: Re: GNU readline and BSD license|
|Previous:||From: Peter Eisentraut||Date: 2000-12-30 01:34:24|
|Subject: Re: GNU readline and BSD license |