On Tue, 10 Feb 2004, David Turner wrote: > I heard that you were considering a proprietary executable compression > scheme for FreeDOS. I'm just writing to let you know the licensing and > freedom implications of this.
Now that you're here anyway ;) I have some questions too: first of all many FreeDOS binaries link some non-free code in the form of various compiler RTL library code. But as far as I understand this is allowed under the special GPL exception " However, as a special exception, the source code distributed need not include anything that is normally distributed (in either source or binary form) with the major components (compiler, kernel, and so on) of the operating system on which the executable runs, unless that component itself accompanies the executable." At one point the question was raised if that applies to the freedos *kernel* too. Since it does not (generally) run *on* an operating system because it is one itself. When I queried Pat Villani (original kernel author) he said that it was still fine as long as the to be included library code is automatically linked in by the compiler rather than code that was explicitly called (32 bit multiplication/div routines, a lot like gcc's libgcc). In any case for the kernel we have our own routines now. But still, because freedos binaries cannot be built with free compilers, for instance the "dosemu-freedos" package is forced into Debian's contrib section and "dosemu" is forced there too. GCC is out of the question, it really isn't designed to generate code for the 8086 (in particular "far" pointers; small model code would be possible but we really need those far pointers for many technical/compatibility reasons). One free compiler I have hope for though is OpenWatcom C; however its license is whilst OSI-approved not quite "free", just like the APSL was. The OW license is due to be updated however, and I asked about a while ago: [gnu.org #137546] AutoReply concerning licensing question: Enquiry about the Sybase Open Watcom Public License. my question was: " For a long time I have been looking for a free compiler for the FreeDOS project, as listed at http://www.gnu.org/directory/devel/prog/Other_programming_languages/freedos.html GCC is problematic since it cannot produce 16-bit x86 code, and it is very difficult to modify it to do so especially to get it to handle "near" and "far" pointers. So far we had to depend on proprietary compilers which was not very attractive, even more so now that these compilers have been abandoned by their manufacturers almost 10 years ago and it is impossible to fix bugs. One potentially free alternative that appeared on the horizon was Open Watcom; unfortunately its license is not GPL compatible. It is very similar to the APSL, which, at least in its 2.0 revision qualifies as free software. What I would like to ask you is if the proposed Sybase Open Watcom Public License 2.0 qualifies as free software as well, even with the differences that exist with respect to the APSL. It follows below, as converted from the PDF version that exists at http://www.openwatcom.org/ftp/license-2.pdf http://www.openwatcom.org/ftp/license-2-redline.pdf (this highlights the differences with the OW license 1.0, which is similar to the APSL 1.2 and hence not free software). If it is not free software I will try to ask the lawyers at Sybase to make the necessary changes. " Is any reply still possible? Bart ------------------------------------------------------- The SF.Net email is sponsored by EclipseCon 2004 Premiere Conference on Open Tools Development and Integration See the breadth of Eclipse activity. February 3-5 in Anaheim, CA. http://www.eclipsecon.org/osdn _______________________________________________ Freedos-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-devel
