> Raul> The OS exception lets people other than the OS distributor
> Raul> distribute GPLed code linked against a proprietary OS.
On Sat, Jun 16, 2001 at 10:13:23PM -0400, Sam Hartman wrote:
> This is not what the text says:
>
> The source code for a work means the preferred form of the work for
> making modifications to it. For an executable work, complete source
> code means all the source code for all modules it contains, plus any
> associated interface definition files, plus the scripts used to
> control compilation and installation of the executable. However, as a
> special exception, the source code distributed need not include
> anything that is normally distributed (in either source or binary
> form) with the major components (compiler, kernel, and so on) of the
> operating system on which the executable runs, unless that component
> itself accompanies the executable.
>
>
> I see nothing in that that applies differently to the OS than to
> others.
This exception says that the OS[1] needn't be considered part of the
source code[2] unless the OS component accompanies the executable[3].
[1] Anything that's normally distributed with the major components of
the OS -- a convoluted phrasing which was introduced when Sun
unbundled the compiler from the OS itself.
[2] Meaning that the GPL needn't apply to the OS.
[3] Those who distribute the OS would be the OS distributors.
> I do now understand how a sufficiently broad interpretation of
> accompanies that executable could prevent us from using this for SSL.
Excellent.
Thanks,
--
Raul
