> http://cdrecord.berlios.de/private/linux-dist.html > > there seems to be some irritation on the licence, on original and > illegal fork. > some distributions switching back from the possibly illegal fork to > the original.
There are obvious things that its maintainer could do if he wanted it to be used in GNU/Linux distributions (e.g. use a GPL-compatible permissive license instead of CDDL). The issue of changing program names in modified versions is mentioned by the FSF, this requirement is barely acceptable in some cases (https://gnu.org/licenses/license-list.html#LPPL-1.2) and is not considered to be required by the GPL. There probably are better arguments to use if there really is a GPL violation.
pgpihrr1lF0Qt.pgp
Description: PGP signature
