Dear List, I have a question about the nature of the GPL with source code.
Assuming that someone is porting GNU/Gnome libs to windows : Can a person distribute just a DLL or lib without the source code being able to compile directly? Or Even worse : if other people base thier DLLS just on the DLLS provided, but no-one is able to recompile the entire thing from scratch, is that legal? Currently I am trying to re-compile some of the gnome/gnu libs ported to windows. Almost non of them compile from the source codes published, there are missing files, missing directories and such. Some people just based their work on these DLLS, and then a whole chain of missing sources gets started up. Can a user just say what version of the sources he used, but not distribute the patches, shell scripts and environmental variables needed to compile? What if the sources are not available as stated. As far as I can tell from the GPL, all sources that do not belong to the standard system install have to be provided, not just the name of the lib used. I am looking forward to your comments, Thanks, mike ===== James Michael DuPont http://introspector.sourceforge.net/ __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? HotJobs - Search Thousands of New Jobs http://www.hotjobs.com -- license-discuss archive is at http://crynwr.com/cgi-bin/ezmlm-cgi?3
