Joerg Schilling 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.
You keep saying this, but I just don't see where it's coming from.
Firstly, the cdrkit source ships with all of the cmake scripts that are
needed by cmake to build the project. This is all that is required by
the GPL.
And before you tell me to "look again" or "go read something" or
whatever -- I did. I have the cdrkit source tarball right here, and I'm
looking at the files in question. I also have a copy of the GPL, which
says exactly this: "plus the scripts used to control compilation and
installation of the executable". Note there is no requirement that the
actual *build tools* be included, only the scripts used to control them.
Otherwise it would be illegal to ship any GPL'd program without the
entire source to make, gcc, binutils, sed, awk, cat, etc.
Secondly, even if they were required to include cmake in the cdrkit
package, they can legally ship cmake and cdrkit in a single package
under the GPL -- the modified BSD license allows this exact combination.
They don't do this because they don't *need* to, but if they did need
to, it would be perfectly legitimate.
I may not be convinced of truth of their argument that cdrtools has
licensing issues. That depends entirely on where you draw the line
between a compilation, which is a derivative work under copyright law,
and a mere aggregation, which is not. But I *am* absolutely convinced
that your counter-argument about cdrkit is absolutely false.
--K
--
gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org mailing list
