colin wrote: > On December 10, 2001 06:11 am, you wrote: > >>colin wrote: >> >>>Also, I don't think you (Jeroen and User1) really understand the GPL. You >>>can't "sheild" proprietory code from the GPL by an LGPL layer. >>> >>This is true. >> >> >>>Proprietory >>>code and GPL code can only coexist under two circumstances: 1) the >>>copyright holder grants an specific excetion or relicenses under a >>>different license to permit this coexistance and 2) the inherent >>>exception that allows GPL programs on proprietory OSes or proprietory >>>programs on GPL OSes, where either can run without the other and so is >>>not considered a "derived work". >>> >>Or 3) The explicit exception in GPL[*] which allows GPLed programs to be >>written for, and run on, operating systems which are not themselves >>GPLed. This would allow Plex86 to be hosted on Windows even if it were >>GPLed (which I am not suggesting). >> >>[*] 3. ... However, as a special exception, the source code distributed >>need not include anything that is normally distributed (in either source >>or binary form) with the major components (compiler, kernel, and so on) >>of the operating system on which the executable runs, unless that >>component itself accompanies the executable. > > I think that was my case 2.
No, it is a different case. In your case you state that "either can run without the other." If you write code that is particular to Windows then it can't run withuot Windows, but such usage is still permitted under GPL because of the explicit "OS exception" > Anyway it doesn't apply because you actually have > to create a kernel level module for windows and the only practical way I know > of to do that uses the Microsoft DDK, which has its own licensing > requirements. You'd better believe there are licensing conflicts between an > MS license and GPL. The DDK would be considered a "major component" the same way that a compiler would be, so there is nothing in the GPL that would prohibit such usage. There may be something in the Microsoft DDK licensing, I don't know. I do know that there does not necessarily need to be anything in the DDK license that conflicts with the GPL, and indeed there did not used to be, but there could be now.
