[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: GPL 2(b) HUH?
From: |
JEDIDIAH |
Subject: |
Re: GPL 2(b) HUH? |
Date: |
Wed, 17 Sep 2008 08:13:17 -0500 |
User-agent: |
slrn/0.9.8.1pl1 (Debian) |
On 2008-09-16, Rjack <user@example.net> wrote:
> It is interesting to note that compiling the source code of standard
> program packages of independently authored c code (and assembler) like
> the Linux kernel does not create a derivative work. Some people think
> that compiling module1.c, module2.c, . . . into "-o prgm" translates
> the source code into a derivative work.
>
> e.g.: gcc -o prgm module1.c module2.c . . .
>
> There is absolutely *no* spark of originality added as gcc assembles the
> source code into an executable -- something thousands of people do
...it also includes it's own versions of fundemental libraries.
Something you would be aware of if you had half a clue to rant with in
this area. The other half a clue is the fact that GCC is specifically
exempt from the strong GPL.
[deletia]
Oracle and EA can figure this out. Why can't you?
--
If you think that an 80G disk can hold HUNDRENDS of |||
hours of DV video then you obviously haven't used iMovie either. / | \
Posted Via Usenet.com Premium Usenet Newsgroup Services
----------------------------------------------------------
http://www.usenet.com
- Re: GPL 2(b) HUH?, (continued)
- Re: GPL 2(b) HUH?, Barry Margolin, 2008/09/19
- Re: GPL 2(b) HUH?, Hyman Rosen, 2008/09/21
- Re: GPL 2(b) HUH?, Barry Margolin, 2008/09/21
- Re: GPL 2(b) HUH?, Hyman Rosen, 2008/09/21
- Re: GPL 2(b) HUH?, Barry Margolin, 2008/09/22
- Re: GPL 2(b) HUH?, David Kastrup, 2008/09/22
- Re: GPL 2(b) HUH?, Hyman Rosen, 2008/09/22
- Re: GPL 2(b) HUH?, Rjack, 2008/09/17
- Re: GPL 2(b) HUH?, Barry Margolin, 2008/09/18
- Re: GPL 2(b) HUH?, David Kastrup, 2008/09/19
Re: GPL 2(b) HUH?,
JEDIDIAH <=
- Re: GPL 2(b) HUH?, Hyman Rosen, 2008/09/17
- Re: GPL 2(b) HUH?, JEDIDIAH, 2008/09/17
- Re: GPL 2(b) HUH?, Rjack, 2008/09/17
- Re: GPL 2(b) HUH?, Hyman Rosen, 2008/09/17
- Re: GPL 2(b) HUH?, Rjack, 2008/09/17
- Re: GPL 2(b) HUH?, Hyman Rosen, 2008/09/17
Message not available
Re: GPL 2(b) HUH?, David Kastrup, 2008/09/17