Re: Understanding the GPL

[Ian Lance Taylor <ian at zembu dot com>]

   Date: Fri, 05 May 2000 16:20:23 -0400
   From: Ken Block USG <block@zk3.dec.com>

   To do this and have minimal impact on users of those distributions,
   we've back ported all the fixes we need to Red Hat 5.2, 6.0, 6.1, 6.2
   and SuSE 6.1, 6.3. We've produced source and binary RPMS. The question
   has been raised if we can actually distribute these kits or if that
   would be a violation of the license? And if we can redistribute how?

If you distribute binaries, you should also distribute the sources
along with them.  It sounds like you are doing that, so it sounds like
you have no problem.

(There are other ways to distribute binaries under the GPL, but it's
easier to not deal with them, and simply always distribute the
sources.)

   Would shipping our proprietary compiler on the same CD with a modified
   version of binutils (with source) be a violation of the GPL? If so, want
   would not be a violation?

Shipping your proprietary compiler on the same CD as GPL code is not a
violation.


I actually think the GPL is quite clear if you read it (it's the
COPYING file in the binutils sources).  There are certainly grey
areas, but if you read the GPL with an open mind and honest intent I
think it is quite obvious what you may and may not do.  If you find
that something in the GPL is unclear, please don't hesitate to ask
about it.

Ian