On 03 Mar 15:41, Joerg Schilling wrote: > Wouter Verhelst <wou...@debian.org> wrote: > > > On Tue, Mar 03, 2009 at 01:09:29PM +0100, Joerg Schilling wrote: > > > You are uninformed: libc on Linux is under LGPL and the LGPL is as > > > "incompatible" to GPL as the CDDL is "incomparible" to the GPL. > > > > Er? > > Well, it seems that you are uninfored.... > > If you like to tell me that mkisofs cannot link against libschily because it > is > CDDL, mkisofs could not link against GNU libc either because it is LGPL.
Err, GPL code can link with LGPL code - the LGPL *removes* restrictions from the GPL, and thus is a compatible licence, as has already been explained to you. Also, libc is (fairly much) a system library, and would therefore get through on that exemption anyways. > If you believe that GNU libc and mkisofs both together create a derived work, > you would need to use the option from the LGPL to tranform the code into GPL. > > .....then you would never be able to have X on a Linux platform again as the > conversion from LGPL to GPL is irreversible and valid for the master copy of > a Distributor. I believe that you're using circular arguments with no relevance to the actual case in hand. libschily is *not* a system library and so does not come through with that exemption, and the CDDL and GPL are incompatible licences. Ho hum, -- Brett Parker -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
