On Thu, 21 Jun 2007, John W. Eaton wrote:
On 21-Jun-2007, Bob Friesenhahn wrote: | You are correct that a strict interpretation of GPL v2 does not allow | GPLed software to be installed using anything other than an an | open-sourced installation program which is itself licenced for | re-distribution under a no more restrictive license than GPL. Really? Even if the installer is not linked with the GPLed program that is installing? Why? I thought the GPL covered derivative works. How would an installer program be a derivative work of the program it installs?
it's not (they're reinterpreting the facts to suit their own biases). Looking over this week's thread, Friesenhahn appears to be the winner in the troll contest. -- Thomas E. Dickey http://invisible-island.net ftp://invisible-island.net _______________________________________________ Autoconf mailing list Autoconf@xxxxxxx http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/autoconf
