[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: > David Kastrup wrote: >> [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: >> >> >> > can be not-GPL, while programs using GPL library has to be GPL. >> >> >> >> It depends on whether the program can work without this _specific_ >> >> library or kernel. >> >> >> > So... tell me about kernel I can easily switch to - without >> > recompiling glibc AND changing source. System calls are very similar >> > in FreeBSD and Linux, however system call 208 for example is >> > different. >> >> The law does not make a significant difference between dynamic and >> static linking, and recompiling would probably be held to the same >> standard as long as the headers don't contain significant >> copyrightable material. > > > You didnt answer
>> (It depends on whether the program can work without this _specific_ >> library or kernel.). > Can glibc work without linux kernel? See <URL:http://www.gnu.org/software/libc/ports.html>. > Now what is difference between glibc not working w/o kernel and some > GUI program not working w/o library. FSF says kernel OK, program > not. Again: glibc does not depend on a particular kernel. I _am_ somewhat surprised that the current version is running on such a limited number of platforms, though. That had not always been the case. You might want to check <URL:http://www.debian.org/ports/netbsd/> and similar, I'd think that they would make use of glibc, too. >> That does not help in itself. Creating an artificial API does not >> create an independent work abstraction as long as the library >> remains the only actual implementation of that API. >> > I tried to point it out during OpenGl example, probably wrong way. > There is an API (well documented) for library and there are two or > more libraries using the API. One is GPL licensed and the rest > not. The product doesnt have to be a GPL licensed. > > Personally I think this falls under "If identifiable sections of that > work are not derived from the Program,.." text from section 2, but > anyway: > True/False? Uh what? > Actually what I said here few post back was that there is no technical > difference between calling syscall and library. > Function problem is same in both cases: glibc wont work w/o kernel and > program w/o library. You say the difference is that kernel is > implementing standard API (POSIX and SYSTEM V.. not really sure), while > library is using some API intended only for this library. > Correct? Depends on library in question, system call in question and other stuff. If a system call is used for manipulating a Linux-specific in-kernel data structure, things might possibly be viewed differently. However, the kernel license NOTE would make it hard for Linus to press this in court without getting an estoppel defense. -- David Kastrup, Kriemhildstr. 15, 44793 Bochum _______________________________________________ gnu-misc-discuss mailing list [email protected] http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnu-misc-discuss
