On Tue, 25 Oct 2016 09:17:08 -0400 Rich Freeman <ri...@gentoo.org> wrote:
> On Tue, Oct 25, 2016 at 8:54 AM, Ulrich Mueller <u...@gentoo.org> > wrote: > > > > Also, calling eclass functions could be considered linking. It is > > not entirely clear to me if e.g. a binpkg built with a CDDL licensed > > ebuild calling GPL licensed eclasses would be distributable at > > all. > > Honestly, I think the GPL linking argument is a difficult one at best, > but setting that aside I think it is even harder to consider calling a > function in an interpreted language "linking." Is it a violation of > the GPL to execute a GPL binary from a bash script that is > GPL-incompatible? Heck, is it a violation of the other license for > the GPL bash interpreter to read and execute the non-GPL lines in the > script? The concept is "derived work": If your script cannot work without the GPL binary, then it is derived work. Alexis.
