I understand you Lucho, but Bart is right: if it's not possible, then just it isn't.
So, we are (OK, I am) in the trap of our own license! The GPL, instead of giving us freedom, takes it away from *us*, the *developers*! Isn't that absurd?! :-(
Besides, nobody has yet written a *real*, convincing argument *why* we have a "combining" and not "aggregation" between the different parts of a compressed executable. So I'm not convinced yet that using aPack would be illegal, EVEN THOUGH I register my own copy, EVEN THOUGH the aPack author *himself* gladly allows this! If this isn't absurd, what else is?! :-(
If this is proved, then the aPack stub source would be needed. But as I told you, there is NONE, as the stub is constructed individually for each executable. Wouldn't be the greatest absurd to demand something that doesn't exist at all?! :-(
THREE absurds here, all caused by the GPL, which we can't change! Aren't they TOO MUCH?! :-(
You can do whatever is in your right to do, that is what GPL allows you to do.
Are licenses written to take away freedom and rights from the DEVELOPERS themselves?! :-(
I disagree, for two reasons: 1 - Tobacco imperialist lost the lawsuit issued by a little number of normal people. So can do Microsoft. 2 - If free/open software starts ignoring license issues, then in the near future this can be used against them, exactly by the same big companies (like Microsoft, but it's not the only one).
Well, I have to agree with you here. TOGETHER we CAN be a REAL force. But ONLY together!
Lucho
------------------------------------------------------- SF.Net is sponsored by: Speed Start Your Linux Apps Now. Build and deploy apps & Web services for Linux with a free DVD software kit from IBM. Click Now! http://ads.osdn.com/?ad_id=1356&alloc_id=3438&op=click _______________________________________________ Freedos-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-devel
