Am Montag 07 Juli 2008 17:30:06 schwätzte Joerg Schilling: > Sascha Hlusiak <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > They claimed that the official build system was not legal but they > > > replaced it with a build system that definitely is not legal because it > > > is not included in the source. > > > > Of course the files needed to build cdrkit are in the source > > (CMakeLists.txt). Does any program that uses autotools come with the > > complete build system? Where does the GPL say that the buildsystem has to > > be included in the distributed source package? > > > > cdrkit uses cmake to build and that's available under a 3-clause BSD > > license which is said to be GPL compatible. > > Please point to a cmake with a 3 clause BSDl!
http://www.cmake.org Click on License. It's also in the file Copyright.txt in cmake-2.4.8.tar.gz, for example. Now please point to a cmake with a 4 clause BSDl! Please Jörg, tell us where you see a legal problem with cdrkit. > Also note: They claim that the build system needs to be published under the > GPL. But it is obviously illegal to change the license of other people's > software. Who is "they"? And can you please quote them and give a reference? AFAIK the build system does not need to be GPL and it's not illegal to change a license if the license itself permits it. But that's not the issue here. Sascha
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
