Alfred M. Szmidt wrote: > Yes. Linux isn't the main kernel that GLIBC supports to begin with. > > Now what is difference between glibc not working w/o kernel and > some GUI program not working w/o library. FSF says kernel OK, > program not. > > The FSF has no say about Linux, add to that, Linux has a special > execption that explictly allows propietary modules to be used. > Can you point me to text of exception? I never said anything about FSF having rights about kernel.
> I tried to point it out during OpenGl example, probably wrong way. > There is an API (well documented) for library and there are two or > more libraries using the API. One is GPL licensed and the rest > not. The product doesnt have to be a GPL licensed. > > If it uses the GPL licensed library, then it has to. The point I am trying to make. Just because you call low-level library kernel and call its functions differently (through interrupt) doesn't mean it has some special rights against some other high level library called through some other mechanism. Last time I checked GPL had no "only kernel" or " only through interrupts". GPL does not AFAIK have some special condition.. for case of kernel. Honza _______________________________________________ gnu-misc-discuss mailing list gnu-misc-discuss@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnu-misc-discuss
