"Joern Rennecke" <joe...@arc.com> writes: > On Wed, Apr 01, 2009 at 03:30:25PM +0200, Richard Guenther wrote: >> On Wed, Apr 1, 2009 at 3:18 PM, Joern Rennecke <joe...@arc.com> wrote: >> > Is that an April fool's joke? >> > >> > The new license allows Java, but it does not allow linking with >> > code that has no dependency on the Runtime Library whatsoever >> > (because it is not considered 'Independent Modules'), and it does not >> >> How would the runtime license apply or be an issue if the runtime is not >> needed? > > Say you have module A, B, C and D. A is the main program and uses B, C > and D. B uses the runtime library, and is therefore an independent module. > Thus, you are allowed to link B with the runtime library. An argument > could be made that A is an independent module because it depends on B, > although that seems a bit risky to bet a companies fortunes on. > At any rate C and D are not independent modules, because they don't need > the runtime library. Hence you are only allowed to convey a work of Target > Code comprising A, B, C and D together with (parts of) the Runtime Library > under the terms of the GPL, if at all.
A, B, C and D considered together are an independent module. There is no reason to separate C and D here. Earlier Bradley Kuhn had indicated that this would be covered in the updated FAQ, but I don't really see it there. I sent him a separate message asking him to update it. Ian
