>Thanks for your response. > >So I guess that means there is no linking into the Samba code, as that >would GPL all of OpenSolaris in my understanding?
You understanding is not entirely correct; merely linking GPL'ed code does not automatically make code under the GPL; it *requires* the code to be under the GPL in order to be able to ship it or binaries based on it. But the GPL itself does not have the power to change licenses. >This also means that someone can develop proprietary non-open-source >extensions of OpenSolaris that link with OpenSolaris code, as long as >any mods of OpenSolaris files are open-sourced, but this would not be >possible with the Samba code. Correct (with the caveat that the license restrictions come into force solely at the time the code is published or shipped; at home, or inside a company, you can do as you please; So Google, e.g., can use a highly modified version of Linux kernel internally without having to publish the code changes; or they can use a highly modified version of OpenSolaris also without having to publish any changes) >So these license distinctions are by source file I guess? When you publish the code/binaries, yes. Casper _______________________________________________ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
