If this be so, then RAR and PKZIP can no longer be chosen as file packers for exactly the same reason.
What an absurd, indeed!
However, the stub is nothing else than uncompressing software, that even if it is inside the same "operating system FILE structure" has no links to it (AFAIK), and there are no other calls inter the stub and the program other than calls to main() and such, just what the OS does (and thus can't be consider linkage, I would say; a different story is the RTL, that was agreed to be covered by that exception clause). Thus should be considered as different components.
Of course! So the "mere aggregation" paragraph of the GPL does apply here!
Otherwise it wouldn't be legal either that you provide an ISO file of a CD-ROM that contains GPL and non-GPL software: both are different types of sotware inside the same "file" entity.
I agree completely with you, Aitor, and I also think that Michael has made another very strong "GPL-atheist" point too. What a pity that the kernel license can no longer be changed... :-( So we remain tied by its ropes, alas! (OK, OK, before someone accuses me that I don't understand the GPL again, I must admit that although I've read it in English and Bulgarian many times, I still don't)
Lucho
------------------------------------------------------- SF.Net is sponsored by: Speed Start Your Linux Apps Now. Build and deploy apps & Web services for Linux with a free DVD software kit from IBM. Click Now! http://ads.osdn.com/?ad_id=1356&alloc_id=3438&op=click _______________________________________________ Freedos-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-devel
