Ralf Corsepius wrote:
On Tue, 2008-10-14 at 10:50 -0400, Alan Cox wrote:
On Tue, Oct 14, 2008 at 01:38:44PM +0200, Ralf Corsepius wrote:
I know the FSF-definition very well. They are defining free in the sense
of "open source"
I don't think they agree with you there, in fact Richard would probably be most
upset at such a claim...
May-be, may-be not.
Fact is: The GPL's notion of freedom is essentially covering freedom on
"source code". It's "viral" nature has has some implications on binaries
("make source code available to customers"), but it nowhere states that
binaries having been built from GPL'ed sources must be "free-beer".
There is no distinction between binaries and source in regard to the
rights recipients have to redistribute them, except for the point that
if you distribute binaries at all you must also make the corresponding
source available to the recipeints.
--
Les Mikesell
lesmikesell@xxxxxxxxx
--
fedora-devel-list mailing list
fedora-devel-list@xxxxxxxxxx
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
