Brian Sniffen wrote: > >Ignore the GPL FAQ for a minute and look at the GPL's 2b: > > b) You must cause any work that you distribute or publish, that in > whole or in part contains or is derived from the Program or any > part thereof, to be licensed as a whole at no charge to all third > parties under the terms of this License. > >The Debian OS contains Kaffe. So the Debian OS as a whole must be >licensed under the terms of the GPL. There are two exceptions to >this: > >First, there's a separation exception: > > If identifiable sections of that work are not derived from the > Program, and can be reasonably considered independent and separate > works in themselves, then this License, and its terms, do not apply > to those sections when you distribute them as separate works. > >This means that it's fine for Kaffe and Eclipse to be distributed >separately. But it's not OK to throw them both on a CD and label it >"Debian OS", if running eclipse loads a program made out of copies of >Kaffe and Eclipse.
That's some strong crack you've been smoking Brian; I'd give it a rest for a while. Your interpretation of how applications, libraries and the kernel live together is *special*. -- Steve McIntyre, Cambridge, UK. [EMAIL PROTECTED] "Because heaters aren't purple!" -- Catherine Pitt
