Michael Poole <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Walter Landry writes: > >> > > > We covered all this earlier, and there was no good explanation of why >> > > > Eclipse + Kaffe is bad but other GPL-incompatible packages + GPLed >> > > > Essential: yes packages are okay. For example: does any non-GPL >> > > > package that calls out (using only cross-platform options) to one of >> > > > the binaries in coreutils, diff, find, grep, gzip, etc violate the >> > > > GPL? >> > > >> > > Many of the utilities are covered by the exemption given by the FSF in >> > > the gpl-interpreter FAQ. >> > >> > The gpl-interpreter FAQ addresses the interpreted scripts, not >> > programs that use the utilities to operate. >> >> The FAQ addresses a GPL'd language and non-GPL'd scripts, which is >> exactly what we have here. > > The FAQ also addresses the execution relationship, and does not > mention distribution together or separately. I cannot see how your > interpretation of "whole work [based on the Program]" can be applied > to Eclipse but not to other non-GPL packages which use GPLed utilities > that are Essential on a Debian system.
It probably is a licensing bug, if those GPL'd utilities are intermingled with the GPL-incompatible packages. My impression is that GPL-incompatible licenses are relatively rare, and that most of the base system has a non-GPL'd alternative. You're trying to convince me not to make this argument because the consequences are horrible, but not only does that not affect its accuracy, I also don't believe the consequences are that horrible. > If the argument is that there is a non-"mere aggregation" relationship > determined by the Depends relationship, the entire Debian system has > the same relationship to Essential packages. If the argument is that > there is a non-"mere aggregation" relationship due to Eclipse needing > a Java interpreter or compiler, the gpl-interpreter FAQ answers it. It has to do with the decision to only put Eclipse in main now that Kaffe can handle it, which demonstrates a closer relationship than mere aggregation. The interpreter exception doesn't apply, because (according to a SableVM author) it also ships with a small GPL'd library, containing classes like Object. > (Incidentally, is not gjc in main? It seems a likely candidate to > substitute for Kaffe if you wish for another GPL-free way to execute > Eclipse.) I don't think gjc can handle Eclipse. If it can, why not Sable-VM or some other non-GPL'd JVM? -Brian -- Brian Sniffen [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
