Hamish Moffatt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > On Thu, Jan 03, 2002 at 10:43:48PM -0800, Thomas Bushnell, BSG wrote: > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Thomas Bushnell, BSG) writes: > > > > > Yes, it is different. One is a program making callouts to a different > > > entity, the kernel. The case we were talking about is that of library > > > linking. > > > > I should add here that it is relevant that the callouts to the kernel > > are callouts to an interface which is defined as "not making things a > > combined derived work", which is not normally the case for a library. > > It is relevant and important here that the authors of the kernel > > intend that understanding of those callouts. > > What is the definition of a "callout"?
By "callout" I mean a mechanism for one program to call another. > Why is it so different to a published library function? > Apart from convenience of argument, that is. Libraries are much more tightly integrated with their callers, for example. > You dismissed my Tcl example without comment but I don't see how > it is different to the kernel case. A non-free program running > in the Tcl interpreter can have the Tcl interpreter load a GPLed > library such as libreadline. The non-free program is not > linked to the library. So why is this illegal? Maybe it is disallowed. I haven't thought about it.
