[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: >> > Can glibc work without linux kernel? >> >> See <URL:http://www.gnu.org/software/libc/ports.html>. >> > All it says is that it can work with only GPLed kernels. > Well, on http://sourceware.org/cgi-bin/cvsweb.cgi/ports/?cvsroot=glibc > you can find ports to AIX or some others not GPL kernels. > > Question: glibc was developed at first on what? Linux kernel?
Nope. libc existed before Linux. > And if so, then it was running only on one kernel with only one > license, so shouldnt it be GPLed at the time? Linux was written to the preexisting POSIX specification. Writing a library to a preexisting standard does not make the library a derivative of some kernel implementing that standard. >> >> 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? >> > I am giving parallel example to glibc working on different kernels with > different licenses. > Program can use one of different OpenGl implementation with different > licenses. I am afraid that both your case as well as the question appear so confused that it is not even possible guess what you mean here. >> > 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. >> > Sorry, could you be more specific on "Depends on library in > question..." No. -- David Kastrup, Kriemhildstr. 15, 44793 Bochum _______________________________________________ gnu-misc-discuss mailing list [email protected] http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnu-misc-discuss
