On Tue, Feb 19, 2008 at 10:50:23AM +0100, Bas Wijnen wrote: > As a sidestep, I think this target may actually be legally required for > GPL (at least 2 and 3) licenced code. They say > > For an executable work, complete source code means all the > source code for all modules it contains, plus any associated > interface definition files, plus the scripts used to control > compilation and installation of the executable. > (version 2), and > The "Corresponding Source" for a work in object code form means > all the source code needed to generate, install, and (for an > executable work) run the object code and to modify the work, > including scripts to control those activities. > (version 3). > > In other words, build rules to generate the binary from source must be > present.
The GPL does not require us to build anything. Just that the source are available. I would also like to point out this exception from the autoconf license: | As a special exception, the Free Software Foundation gives unlimited | permission to copy, distribute and modify the configure scripts that | are the output of Autoconf. You need not follow the terms of the GNU | General Public License when using or distributing such scripts, even | though portions of the text of Autoconf appear in them. The GNU | General Public License (GPL) does govern all other use of the material | that constitutes the Autoconf program. Kurt -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
