Joerg Schilling wrote: > > In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Alan Mackenzie <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >Karen Hill <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote on 22 May 2006 16:49:50 -0700: > > >What is wrong with this? Commands like make have evolved considerably > >since 1972. However, inside the GNU make info page you can read this: > > > > GNU `make' conforms to section 6.2 of `IEEE Standard 1003.2-1992' > > (POSIX.2). > > Do you believe all false claims?
Alan believes that taking two separate and independent computer program works (separate and independent under copyright law, according to the AFC test) and combining them together in a compilation (see 17 USC 101) creates a "derived work" (see the GNU Copyleft Act) akin to "embryo which is derived from the egg and sperm." I gather that he also believes that linking is akin to sex without condoms (and that it is not oral or anal). regards, alexander. _______________________________________________ gnu-misc-discuss mailing list [email protected] http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnu-misc-discuss
