Disclaimer: I am not a lawyer. On Mon, 2005-06-06 at 05:26, condition terminal wrote: > OK, firstly, I am sorry if I am miss understanding the text of the GPL. > > The part I am questioning is this: > > ---QUOTE--- > complete source code means all the source code for all modules it > contains, plus any associated interface definition files, plus the > scripts used to control compilation and installation of the > executable. > --END--QUOTE--- Red Hat make available all of the SRPMs from which the GPL-licenced components of their OSes are built (including RHEL). Red Hat have made available a number of OSes which include the rpmbuild command, using which I can rebuild the SRPMs and get binaries. In my (personal, non-lawyerish) opinion, that means they've fulfilled their obligation under the GPL. At the end of the day, Fedora and RHEL may as well be built with a for loop in shell for all it really seems to matter. Having rebuilt large chunks of various releases of Red Hat myself, the only impact I've seen from not having used beehive is the /etc/beehive-root check in the modern kernel spec files. > The same applies to the scripts for building the ISOs. I have seen > examples of what people have been doing, but no comment form > RH/Fedora. The ISO building scripts are, IIRC, part of anaconda, and distributed with modern versions of RHEL and Fedora. I've not tried building actual ISOs recently, but I've certainly generated all the hdlist files and whatnot for a custom network install. Frankly, having read the rest of this thread, I suspect there won't be much more gained without the consultation of lawyer or three. -- Howard Johnson <merlin@xxxxxxxxxxx> -- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@xxxxxxxxxx http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
