"Grzegorz B. Prokopski" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > On Thu, 2005-13-01 at 19:55 +0100, Måns Rullgård wrote: >> "Grzegorz B. Prokopski" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: >> > If you at least went on and read next paragraph of the FAQ from which >> > you took the above. >> > >> > http://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl-faq.html#IfInterpreterIsGPL >> > >> > "However, when the interpreter is extended to provide "bindings" to >> > other facilities (often, but not necessarily, libraries), the >> > interpreted program is effectively linked to the facilities it uses >> > through these bindings. So if these facilities are released under the >> > GPL, the interpreted program that uses them must be released in a >> > GPL-compatible way. The JNI or Java Native Interface is an example of >> > such a binding mechanism; libraries that are accessed in this way are >> > linked dynamically with the Java programs that call them. These >> > libraries are also linked with the interpreter. If the interpreter is >> > linked statically with these libraries, or if it is designed to link >> > dynamically with these specific libraries, then it too needs to be >> > released in a GPL-compatible way." >> >> I fail to see the relevance of this paragraph to the discussion at >> hand. The alleged incompatibility was between the interpreter (JVM) >> and the program being interpreted. Does Eclipse make explicit use of >> libraries licensed under the GPL? > > It surely does explicitely call java.lang.Object.wait() quite often
java.lang.Object is part of the standard Java API published by Sun (http://java.sun.com/j2se/1.4.2/docs/api/java/lang/Object.html). > (as any multithreaded java program), which in turn calls the JVM, Quite so. > which is purely GPLed. Incorrect. There exists a GPL JVM for sure, but there also exist other JVM implementations (e.g. Sun's) equally capable of running Eclipse. -- Måns Rullgård [EMAIL PROTECTED]