Francesco Poli <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Hi all, > in cdrtools-2.01a38 I found the following weird GPL interpretation. > I wonder if this is considered acceptable for main (I would say that > this is non-free). I don't know whether cdrecord links with (or is > otherwise a derivative work of) other GPL'd software (whose copyright is > held by other people): in that case I would say that this is even > undistributable... :( > > What do you think about this? > There already is a Debian BTS bug report > (http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=265546) about this > issue (it was filed when it was even worse, it seems...), but it says > it's resoved with version 2.01a38. I wonder if you agree... > > NOTE: I am Cc:ing the the package maintainer (Joerg Jaspert) and the > bug-report filer (Andreas Metzler). > I don't know if they would like to be Mail-Followup:ed... > > Issue description follows: > > -=-=-=-= cdrecord/LICENSE =-=-=-=- > > This software is under GPL but you should read the following > clarifications: > > - You may not modify certain copyright messages in cdrecord.c > > See cdrecord.c for further information.
Looks like an invariant section of GFDL infamy. > - You may (with a few exceptions) not modify the location of the > configuration file /etc/default/cdrecord. > > See defaults.c for further information. Looks like lunacy. I don't recall ever reading anything about that in the GPL. > Please note that this is just the way I interpret the GPL and as this > is my software, users should follow my interpretation of the GPL and not > use their own different interpretations. > > -=-=-=-= cdrecord/cdrecord.c (sorry for linewrapping) =-=-=-=- I take it someone on this list followed the recent flame war on lkml. -- Måns Rullgård [EMAIL PROTECTED]
