Re: [chicken-users] silex GPL-2 licensed?

[Leonardo Valeri Manera]

On 19/03/2008, John Cowan <address@hidden> wrote:
>  Correct.  The mere use of a GPLed program (like gcc) to transform text
>  does not infect the output text with the GPL, *unless* the program copies
>  substantial portions of itself into the output.  Bison does so, and for
>  years parser code created by Bison had to be GPLed, but then the FSF
>  changed the license on the parser skeleton so that this was no longer so.

Ok, so /binary/ programs that use silex in some way dont need to be
GPL'd because of that.

I take it that this means that silex is never a runtime dependency.

Question:

Does this mean distributing the c intermediates of an app along with
the chicken libraries (in c form) and eggs (again in c form) needed to
run it therefore has no need for silex either and can be distributed
under, for example, a BSD license?

I ask because as an eINIT developer, I have to keep track of our
ability to bundle all the necessary code to run our scheme subsystem -
for obvious reasons, an init system with /usr/lib dependencies is not
an ideal solution... in fact the ability to do this is one of the
reasons we're dropping guile in favor of chicken. And eINIT is
BSD-licensed.

Cheers,
Leo