> I interpret them as FSF wanting to drum up the importance of GPL a bit by > purposefully not clarifying this area. The case of linking non-GPL software with > GPL libraries is quite common and important, and if they wanted to add an entry > to the FAQ, they certainly would. They talk a lot about "plugins", but that's a > significantly different case, because a plugin is very closely tied to the program > that loads it.
> In the GPL there's very little about what derived means. Various interpretations > in the FSF FAQ are post-factum, and not part of the license. I'm pretty sure that > the interpretation that independent works distributed as parts of a distro are > still independent is in agreement with both the spirit and the letter of the GPL. > In Galoob v. Nintendo, in appeal, it was ruled that the derivative work "must > incorporate a portion of the copyrighted work in some form", which does not > happen when you just put two rpms side by side. That's an interesting point of view. I have no further questions :) Thanks, Krzy _______________________________________________ systemd-devel mailing list systemd-devel@lists.freedesktop.org https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/systemd-devel