From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970
Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org ([69.77.167.62] helo=lists.gentoo.org)
by finch.gentoo.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60)
(envelope-from <gentoo-user+bounces-81700-garchives=archives.gentoo.org@lists.gentoo.org>)
id 1KFsvb-0001IR-6V
for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Mon, 07 Jul 2008 15:46:59 +0000
Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1])
by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id D1272E055B;
Mon, 7 Jul 2008 15:46:57 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from cdptpa-omtalb.mail.rr.com (cdptpa-omtalb.mail.rr.com [75.180.132.122])
by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B4773E0558
for <gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org>; Mon, 7 Jul 2008 15:46:57 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from basement.kutulu.org ([70.121.200.185])
by cdptpa-omta02.mail.rr.com with ESMTP
id <20080707154657.FEGG2063.cdptpa-omta02.mail.rr.com@basement.kutulu.org>
for <gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org>;
Mon, 7 Jul 2008 15:46:57 +0000
Received: by basement.kutulu.org (Postfix, from userid 58)
id E464311457; Mon, 7 Jul 2008 11:46:56 -0400 (EDT)
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.2.5 (2008-06-10) on basement.kutulu.org
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.4 required=5.0 tests=ALL_TRUSTED,BAYES_00
autolearn=ham version=3.2.5
Received: from [127.0.0.1] (localhost [127.0.0.1])
by basement.kutulu.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id E9ECF1143D
for <gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org>; Mon, 7 Jul 2008 11:46:54 -0400 (EDT)
Message-ID: <48723B18.5030000@kutulu.org>
Date: Mon, 07 Jul 2008 11:49:44 -0400
From: Mike Edenfield <kutulu@kutulu.org>
User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.14 (Windows/20080421)
Precedence: bulk
List-Post: <mailto:gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gentoo-user+help@lists.gentoo.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:gentoo-user+unsubscribe@lists.gentoo.org>
List-Subscribe: <mailto:gentoo-user+subscribe@lists.gentoo.org>
List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail <gentoo-user.gentoo.org>
X-BeenThere: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org
Reply-to: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org
Subject: Re: [gentoo-user] on cdr{kit,tools} and licensing (was: emerge -avC
cdrkit && emerge -av cdrtools)
References: <486F599D.4090606@konstantinhansen.de> <200807061729.47921.alan.mckinnon@gmail.com> <4870f116.QK7RcdN+vW0tJtGN%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de> <200807062035.21483.alan.mckinnon@gmail.com> <48711a2e.ubKRGLogmitzpet1%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de> <48714198.5000406@paradise.net.nz> <4871def1.srqmLwgcR5gyNF+P%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de> <6142e6140807070337j6489758fn2194ad2050d4cb4c@mail.gmail.com> <48722bc0.PwfyibHt0tjungCs%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de>
In-Reply-To: <48722bc0.PwfyibHt0tjungCs%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Archives-Salt: 655a9fb2-b57d-4a87-8040-b11c43214453
X-Archives-Hash: 9cb39dc5fa962786c03ca2e190ee77bc
Joerg Schilling wrote:
> They claimed that the official build system was not legal but they replaced it
> with a build system that definitely is not legal because it is not included in
> the source.
You keep saying this, but I just don't see where it's coming from.
Firstly, the cdrkit source ships with all of the cmake scripts that are
needed by cmake to build the project. This is all that is required by
the GPL.
And before you tell me to "look again" or "go read something" or
whatever -- I did. I have the cdrkit source tarball right here, and I'm
looking at the files in question. I also have a copy of the GPL, which
says exactly this: "plus the scripts used to control compilation and
installation of the executable". Note there is no requirement that the
actual *build tools* be included, only the scripts used to control them.
Otherwise it would be illegal to ship any GPL'd program without the
entire source to make, gcc, binutils, sed, awk, cat, etc.
Secondly, even if they were required to include cmake in the cdrkit
package, they can legally ship cmake and cdrkit in a single package
under the GPL -- the modified BSD license allows this exact combination.
They don't do this because they don't *need* to, but if they did need
to, it would be perfectly legitimate.
I may not be convinced of truth of their argument that cdrtools has
licensing issues. That depends entirely on where you draw the line
between a compilation, which is a derivative work under copyright law,
and a mere aggregation, which is not. But I *am* absolutely convinced
that your counter-argument about cdrkit is absolutely false.
--K
--
gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org mailing list