> -----Original Message-----
> From: Jeroen Janssen [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]

> Anyway, this does this mean we also can't do the following? :
> * fix any problems in the bootmanager or plex86 that prevents 
> plex86 to 
> be able to *run* the bootmanager (from a floppy)

The changes to the boot manager to make it work with Plex86 would need to be
GPL.  Personally I would pass those changes back to the boot manager
maintainer under GPL.  Then the changes to Plex86 to make it work with the
boot manager would be LGPL and just reincorporated into Plex86.  Two
separate works, two separate licenses.

> * make an image of a floppy containing the bootmanager (or 
> tell people 
> how to make one)

You can tell them how to make one and make one for yourself.

> * put the floppy image online somewhere?

I believe if you distribute a floppy image, you also have to distribute the
source for what it contains when the contents are GPL, in this case, the
boot manager.  I know it works this way for normal executables, I assume it
works the same way for boot code.  Any lawyers in the house?

While you didn't ask, the sticky point where things get cloudy for me is if
Plex86 incorporated a local copy of the boot manager code that still
remained a separate executable, but might be used to automate the creation
of a floppy image.  I think this would be allowed, but the boot manager and
any changes to it would remain under GPL, while Plex86 remained under GPL.
Plex86 still could not make direct use of the GPL'd code.  As long as the
coupling is not intimate you should be alright.  The following from the GPL
FAQ might be clearer:

The question, "I have written an application that links with many different
components, that have different licenses. I am very confused as to what
licensing requirements are placed on my program. Can you please tell me what
licenses I may use?" leads to another "What is the difference between 'mere
aggregation' and 'combining two modules into one program'?" to which part of
the answer is:

"By contrast, pipes, sockets and command-line arguments are communication
mechanisms normally used between two separate programs. So when they are
used for communication, the modules normally are separate programs. But if
the semantics of the communication are intimate enough, exchanging complex
internal data structures, that too could be a basis to consider the two
parts as combined into a larger program"

--
"The world was a clear place until with lawyers came smog."

Reply via email to