From: Jason Voegele <jason@...>
Date: 2001-11-08T03:21:30+09:00
Subject: [ruby-talk:24553] Re: Final word on rdtool vs. doxygen licensing

I don't think that's quite true.  Here's an excerpt from the GPL FAQ:

<quote>
I am writing free software that uses non-free libraries. What legal issues 
come up if I use the GPL?

If the libraries that you link with falls within the following exception in 
the GPL: 

     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.

then you don't have to do anything special to use them. In other words, if 
the libraries you need come with major parts of a proprietary operating 
system, the GPL says people can link your program with them. 

If you want your program to link against a library not covered by that 
exception, you need to add your own exception, wholly outside of the GPL. 
</quote>

Perhaps I misunderstand, though.

Jason


> Bluntly: It's not an issue, except in the minds of certain licensing
> fanatics  with an ideological axe to grind. It is quite legal to call
> external programs  (such as doxygen) that are GPL'ed, without GPL'ing
> your product. Virtually  every proprietary program on Linux calls
> GPL'ed external programs at least in  their installer (which is
> generally a shell script, which calls the GPL'ed  GNU 'awk', 'sed',
> 'test', etc. programs). Anybody who says this is a problem  is grinding
> an ideological axe rather than a legal one. The Ruby code that  does
> this (calls the external program) can be released under any license we 
> wish -- including a proprietary license, if so desired. We have 7 years
> of  commercial software experience on the Linux platform showing that
> this is so.  Even RMS agrees with this position, because it increases
> the number of GPL'ed  programs, which is his main goal. 'Nuff said.
> 
> Let's get on with discussing the technical merits, such as, e.g., is
> doxygen  cross-platform? Are there better documentation systems out
> there? Would it be  technically better to improve rdtool rather than
> move to a different system?  Etc. etc. etc. 
> 
> -- 
> Eric Lee Green          GnuPG public key at
> http://badtux.org/eric/eric.gpg
>            mailto:eric@badtux.org  Web: http://www.badtux.org
>              You do not save freedom by destroying freedom