>> Here comes the fun part: SK> Well, even more fun:
SK> If HIMEM(64) is under GPL, you may not do it either. SK> You must release the executable under a different license; which, however, SK> can be shipped in the same archive. it's like ' this sentence is false ' as the EMM*.zip archives are selfcontradicting (because they claim to be GPL, but aren't) they might crash any GPL-aware OS internal logic. please remove them from all open source OS disks before you see a kernel panic() ;) SK> Exepackers, regardless if Open- or Closed- source, if GPL by themselves or SK> not, are not considered as to "modify" a Program in the sense of GPL, SK> because it does not change the program. It merely constitutes a method of SK> delivery, like other archivers. Every contributor to the _FreeDOS_ project SK> repository shall agree to this, too. Of course, everybody is allowed to SK> branch his/her own package incl. his/her contributions that inflicts the SK> fully GPL, as haircutting as laid out by this thread. Exactly my thinking. but this would change licensing blablabla... tom ------------------------------------------------------- SF.Net is sponsored by: Speed Start Your Linux Apps Now. Build and deploy apps & Web services for Linux with a free DVD software kit from IBM. Click Now! http://ads.osdn.com/?ad_id=1356&alloc_id=3438&op=click _______________________________________________ Freedos-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-devel
