Home Messages Index
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Author IndexDate IndexThread Index

Re: Towards a Few Main Linux Distributions?

Roy Schestowitz wrote:
> A GPL requirement could have a chilling effect on derivative distros
>
> ,----[ Quote ]
> | Many derivative distributions, then, seem to be on their own in a
> | difficult situation where good intentions and creativity count for
> | nothing beside the letter of the law.
> `----
>
> http://software.newsforge.com/article.pl?sid=06/06/23/1728205&from=rss

My reading of this is that there is nothing really new here.

GPL has always required that the source code - being used in the binary
- be available in source code form, in some form that can be easily
distributed.  Many companies offer the source code an a web site, where
it can be freely downloaded.

This has been a requirement for over 22 years.  I'm surprised that the
publisher of Mepis didn't understand that he needed to put the source,
for the binaries being distributed, into some sort of publicly
accessible read-only repository.

If there are proprietary applications or utilities that link to the
GLIBC shared library (like a DLL), those can still be distributed in
"binary only" form, other LGPL libraries have similar distinctions.
Many applications, including the Linux kernel itself, have properly
authorized mechanisms for adding "plug-ins" and "drivers" which may be
proprietary or may be distributed in Binary-only form.

Mepis and Xandros have some particular challenges, because there are
some sections of the distribution which are GPL, some which are LGPL,
some which are OSS, and some which are proprietary and licensed by
proprietary companies (Including Microsoft) such as Crossover.

Keeping all of the players streight isn't always easy.  On has to
partition the software into "zones", and make sure they understand each
zone.

What is more interesting is that this article plays into a FUD campaign
that has often been used against OSS, but the author of the article has
clearly done very little reseach into the actual practices of managing
these licenses.

Even more bizarre is that the distributor of Mepis didn't understand
any of these requirements before publishing his distribution in binary
form.


[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Author IndexDate IndexThread Index