Scripsit Don Armstrong <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > On Wed, 26 Nov 2003, Henning Makholm wrote:
> > #1 explicitly applies only to "the Program's source code", but #2 > > speaks generally about "the Program", source code or not. > > Sure, but the only type of distribution allowed under #2 is > distribution under #1 (You may modify your copy or copies of the > Program [...] and copy and distribute such modifications or work under > the terms of Section 1 above) which is distribution of "the Program's > source code," The reference to #1 obviously targets only the part after "provided that". There is a completely similar reference from #3, and #3 unambigously does not speak about source. > [We come right back to the question of whether or not the binary is > source. No. The binary in question is clearly not source. -- Henning Makholm "What a hideous colour khaki is."
