Rando Christensen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Noticing something I missed when I sent this - this doesn't mention that > it's the GPL, nor does it say where to get it besides ``the source''. Is > that a violation of the GPL?
No, but it's a violation to distribute just the binary ls and nothing else under these conditions. It's a minor violation and between friends the FSF would of course ignore it. But if it were a big site, with hundreds of mirrors, the FSF might reasonably worry that some people would be getting the software and not knowing about the freedoms they have.
