Matthew, > I want to recompile cvs as a library and write just > enough Inline::C > code to access that library's functions.
This sounds like what inline is made for, and brings me back to my current question about the GPL. I'll try to stay focused to the current problem thought <grin>. One question for me again is that of licencing of inlined modules. And that CVS is GPLd, it is appropriate to bring that up here. Can it be possible that just because you link to a GPLed code via PAL licence that the user of the Inline::Lib cannot create a closed source application that uses the GPLED? That the GPL faq says that dual licences http://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl-faq.html#IfInterpreterIsGPL "A consequence is that if you choose to use GPL'd Perl modules or Java classes in your program, you must release the program in a GPL-compatible way, regardless of the license used in the Perl or Java interpreter that the combined Perl or Java program will run on." Anyway, the CVS authors might not be dead-set against creating an API, even if other tools don't have to be GPLed. The GPL always allows you to ask permission (if you care to). mike ===== James Michael DuPont __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Try FREE Yahoo! Mail - the world's greatest free email! http://mail.yahoo.com/
