On Jun 26, 2007, Al Boldi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> Is it in the spirit of GPLv2?
> No, but that's besides the point. Thanks for informing me about the point *I*'m trying to make ;-) > You can only hold people responsible for the letter, lest there be chaos. That's not *quite* how it works, but that's a general idea, yes. >> How are the sources passed on in this way going to benefit the user or the >> community? > They still have to provide the source by other GPL means of their choosing. This is contradictory. You said the scenario I described was permitted, and the scenario included the vendor's refusal to give customers other copies of the sources. Which is it? -- Alexandre Oliva http://www.lsd.ic.unicamp.br/~oliva/ FSF Latin America Board Member http://www.fsfla.org/ Red Hat Compiler Engineer [EMAIL PROTECTED], gcc.gnu.org} Free Software Evangelist [EMAIL PROTECTED], gnu.org} - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
