Cross-posting and redirecting follow-ups to m.legal Gervase Markham wrote: > Sergey Yanovich wrote: >> I've always been curious, how well patching MS CRT for jemalloc fares >> with GPLv2, namely with Article 2 Part b): > > What is the current situation w.r.t. Firefox on Windows? Do we bundle > any binary modules, e.g. the MS CRT? If not, we should consider whether > that's a boundary we want to cross.
Firefox 3.0 on Windows already ships jemalloc patched MS CRT. > As to what happens if you tried to distribute a GPLed Mozilla-based > browser with a jemalloc-patched MSCRT which was therefore not a System > Library, I'd suspect that you'd be in trouble. But I'd have to check > carefully. Basically, you said what I said. The described product ain't GPLed. Careful checking applies mostly to consequences. > As we try hard to make our code equally usable under whichever licence a > licensee chooses, this would be a good reason *not* to make having to > match the MS CRT with jemalloc compulsory to build the codebase. Absolutely! -- Sergey Yanovich _______________________________________________ legal mailing list [email protected] https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/legal
