Grzegorz B. Prokopski, on 2005-01-13, 13:43, you wrote:
However, when the interpreter is extended to provide bindings to
other facilities (often, but not necessarily, libraries), the
interpreted program is effectively linked to the facilities it uses
through these bindings. So if these
Raul Miller wrote:
On Thu, Jan 13, 2005 at 04:35:50PM -0500, Grzegorz B. Prokopski wrote:
If Eclipse does use JNI, would still a question about whether or not
Kaffe's JNI implementation constitute some kind of extension designed
to work around the GPL or whether they are some kind of
On Fri, 2005-01-14 at 08:52 -0600, Jerry Haltom wrote:
Yes, we've seen this before. It is not good it ignores a lock after
only 5 seconds. Maybe, as a debian-specific patch we could have this
timeout somewhat increased? 20s?
Sounds reasonable, unless anyone has serious
Grzegorz B. Prokopski wrote:
Yet, if you *package* this program together with a JVM, so that when
the user says I want to build this package or I want to run this
package the user gets your program with a specific JVM, then it's not
a mere aggregation, but these two are explicitely bound together.
Grzegorz B. Prokopski wrote:
If you at least went on and read next paragraph of the FAQ from which
you took the above.
http://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl-faq.html#IfInterpreterIsGPL
However, when the interpreter is extended to provide bindings to
other facilities (often, but not necessarily,
Brian Thomas Sniffen wrote:
Måns Rullgård [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
It is compiled against an interface, not an implementation. Which
particular implementation was used while compiling is irrelevant.
Can you support this assertion? The program, including its libraries,
which the developer
Dalibor Topic [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Brian Thomas Sniffen wrote:
Måns Rullgård [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
It is compiled against an interface, not an implementation. Which
particular implementation was used while compiling is irrelevant.
Can you support this assertion? The program,
Dalibor Topic [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
How Kaffe, the GPld interpreter, goes about loading GPLd parts of
*itself* into memory, whether it uses JNI, KNI, dlopen, FFI, libtool,
or other bindings, or whether it asks the user to tilt switches on
an array of light bulbs is irrelevant to the
On Fri, Jan 14, 2005 at 01:39:09PM -0500, Brian Thomas Sniffen wrote:
But what ends up on the user's Debian system when he types apt-get
install eclipse; eclipse is a program incorporating a JVM and many
libraries. Debian's not just distributing Eclipse or just
distributing Kaffe -- the idea
Brian Thomas Sniffen [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Dalibor Topic [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
How Kaffe, the GPld interpreter, goes about loading GPLd parts of
*itself* into memory, whether it uses JNI, KNI, dlopen, FFI, libtool,
or other bindings, or whether it asks the user to tilt switches on
Måns Rullgård [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Brian Thomas Sniffen [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Dalibor Topic [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
How Kaffe, the GPld interpreter, goes about loading GPLd parts of
*itself* into memory, whether it uses JNI, KNI, dlopen, FFI, libtool,
or other bindings, or
Brian Thomas Sniffen wrote:
I am. I'm not talking about the .deb file containing Eclipse. If you
think you can provide someone with the Eclipse IDE program without
providing a JVM, I invite you to try.
You mean like Fedora? Eclipse 3 nicely compiled to native with gcj, yum,
and balzing fast,
On Thu, 2005-13-01 at 23:42 -0500, Brian Thomas Sniffen wrote:
Grzegorz B. Prokopski [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
These facilities include class loading, class instantiation,
synchronization, garbage collection (ie. you can trigger GC from within
your program), reflection (ie. you can ask VM
On Fri, 2005-14-01 at 20:56 +0100, Dalibor Topic wrote:
Brian Thomas Sniffen wrote:
I am. I'm not talking about the .deb file containing Eclipse. If you
think you can provide someone with the Eclipse IDE program without
providing a JVM, I invite you to try.
You mean like Fedora?
Grzegorz B. Prokopski wrote:
Your email messages do not contain calls to GPLed functions, do they?
Depends on the message :)
But that's not the point. The point is that the mere existance of a
chunk of non GPL-compatible memory within a GPLd proces' memory does not
necessarily constitute a GPL
Raul Miller [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
If there actually is something going wrong, I'd really like for someone
to spell out what it is in some fashion which addresses the above points.
Everything you said there seems reasonable to me (at first glance).
It's fine for the Kaffe developers and
inline
On Fri, 14 Jan 2005 16:16:41 -0500, Brian Thomas Sniffen wrote:
Raul Miller [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
If there actually is something going wrong, I'd really like for someone
to spell out what it is in some fashion which addresses the above points.
Everything you said there seems
Grzegorz B. Prokopski [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Your implementation creates a huge loophole in GPL, that I do not
believe is there. Let's continue your way of seeing interepter
features and see what would be the consequences.
An example. I am writing an app. A GPL-incompatible or even
Dalibor Topic [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
When I instruct my computer running the Debian OS to load and run
eclipse, the code from some JVM package and the code from the Eclipse
package and from dozens of others are loaded into memory. The process
on my computer is mechanical, so we should
Oh yeah, the answer:
We just do. Because the grep developers don't mind, apparently. They
aren't going to sue us... they'd probably tell us to stop before they sued
us anyways. We are at no risk from this.
Kaffe developers: do you mind?
Kaffe Developers Of course not, read the classpath
Grzegorz B. Prokopski wrote:
I would then just take the GPLed code of this GC library, GPLed code
of readline, cut out the pieces I need, integrate into my interepreter
and call it interepter features. Thus, according to you, my
GPL-incompatible program would be able to use GPLed code thanks to
Brian Thomas Sniffen [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Dalibor Topic [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
When I instruct my computer running the Debian OS to load and run
eclipse, the code from some JVM package and the code from the Eclipse
package and from dozens of others are loaded into memory. The
On Fri, Jan 14, 2005 at 05:57:54PM +0100, Dalibor Topic wrote:
Now, before you go off ranting about Kaffe's native libraries, please
take a moment to let the fact sink in that while these native libraries
are the result of Kaffe developers being a somewhat clever bunch at
developing
On Fri, Jan 14, 2005 at 04:44:39PM -0500, Brian Thomas Sniffen wrote:
But you can see that it's not mere aggregation, because they invoke
each other when run.
Evidence is not proof.
--
Raul
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL
Brian Thomas Sniffen wrote:
I'm not talking about running; I'm talking about making a copy of
Eclipse and a copy of Kaffe and putting them both on an end-user's
system such that when I type eclipse I get a program made out of
both.
You don't get a program made out of both any more than you get a
The entirety of GPL section 2 applies only to works based on the
Program. In context, this applies only to derivative works and
(copyrightable) collections (the GPL says collective works, but this
is obviously a thinko) under copyright law. The combination of Kaffe
and Eclipse is neither of this
Dalibor Topic [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Brian Thomas Sniffen wrote:
I'm not talking about running; I'm talking about making a copy of
Eclipse and a copy of Kaffe and putting them both on an end-user's
system such that when I type eclipse I get a program made out of
both.
You don't get a
Måns Rullgård [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Brian Thomas Sniffen [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Dalibor Topic [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
When I instruct my computer running the Debian OS to load and run
eclipse, the code from some JVM package and the code from the Eclipse
package and from dozens of
28 matches
Mail list logo
