Steve Langasek <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > On Thu, Aug 19, 2004 at 11:09:11AM +0200, Måns Rullgård wrote: >> Steve Langasek <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > >> > If your understanding of the license exception requirements were >> > correct, it would be a very easy loophole for people to exploit, using >> > GPL-compatible library layers to "sanitize" the licenses of library >> > dependencies. > >> > But in fact, the GPL's definition of source code is: > >> > 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. > >> > For GPL applications linked against curl, "all modules it contains" >> > includes both libcurl and libssl. > >> When using dynamic linking that is not necessarily the case. Most >> dynamic linkers use lazy loading of libraries, such that the openssl >> libraries would not actually be mapped in to the process address space >> until one of its functions is called. If, as per assumption, the >> application does not use any ssl related features of curl, the openssl >> libraries would never be touched, except for a possible scan of its >> symbol table. The openssl libraries could be replaced by another >> library containing dummy entries for all the required symbols and the >> curl using application would still function correctly. How the >> presence or absence of a particular library at runtime could possibly >> change the derivedness of a some program from said library is beyond >> my comprehension. > > I didn't say anything about derived works. Neither does the GPL when > talking about source code. > > The GPL also doesn't define source code to include "all modules it > uses", it defines it to include "all modules it contains".
Could you please explain to me how something linked against libcurl contains openssl? -- Måns Rullgård [EMAIL PROTECTED]
