On 22 Jan 2004, AthlonRob <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Thu, 2004-01-22 at 19:17, Martin Pool wrote: > > > > http://www.opensource.apple.com/darwinsource/tarballs/other/distcc-17.tar.gz > > > > > > All of apple's open-source stuff can be downloaded from there. > > > > Whether you can download it is somewhat beside the point. The > > question is whether Daniele got either the source or a written offer. > > In order to distribute binaries of distcc, you must distribute them with > the source code... as in in the installation program or the binary > installation file? A distcc RPM must include either the source code or > a written (as in, on paper?) offer?
That is correct, at least for commercial distributions such as Apple's. See the GPL s3. This is why, when you buy a commercial Linux distribution, you almost always get source discs even if you did not ask for them. It is not necessary for every RPM to include the source but you must offer the source as well, except under the conditions of s3(c). I don't know if "written" means "written on paper" or whether it is OK to have it in ASCII. I would expect that for a purely electronic distribution it is OK to have an electronic offer. But you don't need to believe me; just read the GPL. > FWIW, the URL above (if you didn't check) *is* the source code and > patches. As I said, that is not the point. It should not be necessary for anyone to ask around in the hope of finding the source. Apple must provide it (or an offer to send it.) -- Martin
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
__ distcc mailing list http://distcc.samba.org/ To unsubscribe or change options: http://lists.samba.org/mailman/listinfo/distcc
