Alan Mackenzie wrote:
That's one of the things that requires GPL licensing. The overarching thing that mandates new code being licensed under the GPL is its being a modification of a GPL program.
And a separately written program which makes calls to existing GPLed code is not a modification of that code.
If the invoked function is essentially a part of the calling program,
> it must also be GPL. First, you must distinguish between the source and binary. A separately written piece of source code does not fall under any copyright but its own, regardless of what function calls are embedded in its text. If the compiled binary file incorporates a copy of the foreign code, then to copy and distribute the binary in that form requires permission from the copyright holder of the included work. If it does not incorporate the foreign code (which is the case when dynamic linking is used) then the binary also does not fall under any copyright but its own.
This is covered by section 2 of GPL2
As has been mentioned, before you read the GPL, you must decide whether copyright law demands that any other rights aside from the author's need to be considered. If the program does not physically include significant parts of other copyrighted works, then no other copyright licenses need to be considered. _______________________________________________ gnu-misc-discuss mailing list [email protected] http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnu-misc-discuss
