Re: Windows?

[Sergei Steshenko]

--- On Wed, 5/13/09, Jordi Gutiérrez Hermos <address@hidden> wrote:

> From: Jordi Gutiérrez Hermos <address@hidden>
> Subject: Re: Windows?
> To: "Sergei Steshenko" <address@hidden>
> Cc: address@hidden, "Przemek Klosowski" <address@hidden>
> Date: Wednesday, May 13, 2009, 4:02 PM
> 2009/5/13 Sergei Steshenko <address@hidden>:
> > That's why I'm talking about static vs dynamic linking
> - dynamic linking
> > ensures the GPL code is _separable_ from
> GPL-incompatible code.
> 
> This is a tired issue:
> 
>      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GNU_General_Public_License#The_GPL_in_court
> 
> The FSF's opinion is that dynamic linking is a derived
> work. Others
> disagree. It hasn't been tested in court, so who knows if
> it really is
> or not.
> 
> However, since no one has attempted to contest this either
> by dynamic
> linking and contesting that it is not a derived work, it is
> de facto
> the working interpretation of the GPL that a
> dynamically-linked work
> falls under the terms of the GPL.
> 
> That's all there is to it.
> 
> - Jordi G. H.
> 

It doesn't matter it's derivative work in this case.

GPL mandates how you _distribute_ source + binaries, but _not_ how you 
_use_ them.

http://docforge.com/wiki/GPL :

"Freedom to run the program, for any purpose.".


So, I do not disagree with FSF.

Do you want me to again find in the GPL FAQ explicit permission to link
with GPL-incompatible code in house ?

For example, I recently built ffmpeg (LGPL, executable may be GPL).

Its configure explicitly allows to choose non-free codecs. I chose both
LGPL _and_ non-free codesc.

This is what it shows:

"
install/ffmpeg-0.5/binsh/ffplay -L
FFplay version 0.5, Copyright (c) 2003-2009 Fabrice Bellard, et al.
  configuration: --enable-bzlib --enable-swscale --enable-shared --enable-gpl 
--enable-nonfree --enable-x11grab --enable-vdpau --enable-fastdiv 
--enable-hardcoded-tables 
--prefix=/mnt/sdb8/sergei/AFSWD_debug/install/ffmpeg-0.5
  libavutil     49.15. 0 / 49.15. 0
  libavcodec    52.20. 0 / 52.20. 0
  libavformat   52.31. 0 / 52.31. 0
  libavdevice   52. 1. 0 / 52. 1. 0
  libswscale     0. 7. 1 /  0. 7. 1
  built on May 11 2009 02:16:42, gcc: 4.2.1 (SUSE Linux)
This version of FFplay has nonfree parts compiled in.
Therefore it is not legally redistributable.
".

So, I am _not_ distributing the binary, but I _am_ using it at home.

And if anybody asks, I _will_ provide him/her with a script (part of which,
by the way, is GPL; it's the same script I'm using to build 'octave') that 
builds ffmpeg from source the same way I does it for me. This is like
distributing instructions - see the reply JWE got from licensing engineer.

And ffmpeg team did _not_ distribute such a binary too.

Similar situation was with QEMU/KQEMU while/when KQEMU was _not_ GPL. The
project site explicitly stated that precompiled KQEMU could _not_ be
distributed with QEMU, but everybody was free to build KQEMU from source
on his/her computer from source and use it with QEMU.

'octave' _can_ be built in-house with incompatible linear algebra package,
again, it can _not_ be distributed, but it _can_ be used.


Regards,
  Sergei.