Re: what is the current status of GPL v3

[Alfred M. Szmidt]

       These are improved versions of programs originally from BSD.
       ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

And this means that GNU inetutils cannot be part of the GNU system?
Amazing.

   > Emacs was to a significant degreed developed by third parties, I
   > guess it too isn't part of the GNU system.

   Is is a component of a compilation, but as such is a single entity
   (with very few exceptions (c) FSF due to the practice of copyright
   assignments) and has been developed mostly as a single entity.
   However, there are subsystems (like calc) which have historically
   been distributed as separate entities.  So parts of Emacs can be
   considered aggregated.  There is no necessity for drawing a line
   here, however, since copyright and license for the components in
   distribution rest with FSF and the GPL.

Copyright doesn't state if something is or isn't part of a operating
system.

   > Nor is GCC, which is being developed by RedHat, and then we have
   > the GNU C library which also is being developed by RedHat.

   It sure is part of any GNU system, in the form of an aggregation
   (in the case of GCC).  The C library, however, is linked with the
   executables, and that exceeds mere aggregation.  The C library,
   however, is licensed under the LGPL.

The license and copyright have nothing to do with this.  The GNU C
Library is part of the GNU system, doesn't matter if you do not like
it or not.  It doesn't matter if it is licensed under the LGPL or not,
it doesn't even matter if it is being developed by Red Hat.  It is a
GNU project, and that is one criteria of what is considered to be part
of the GNU system.

   > The copyright situation doesn't dictate if something is part or
   > not of an operating system, or a project.

   Looks like you again confused what this thread is supposed to be
   about.  You objected against GNU systems being a compilation, and
   that concerns its copyright situation and nothing else.

No, it doesn't.  You can have a single entity with several copyright
holders.  Like Linux, or is Linux also a compilation according to you?

   > GCC isn't fully copyrighted by the FSF, neither are many
   > projects, yet they are GNU projects, then there are non-GNU
   > projects which are part of the GNU system.

   Which, for that reason, is mostly to be considered a compilation
   with regard to the copyright situation.

Nope, it isn't.  Please read up on what a compilation is, and please
stop confusing compilations with the GNU system.  Next thing we know
is that OpenBSD isn't _really_ a single entity; a operating system,
but a compilation of totally disjoint tools that Theo thought was nice
to publish.