Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Fri, 27 Oct 2000 14:07:05 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Fri, 27 Oct 2000 14:06:55 -0400 Received: from brutus.conectiva.com.br ([200.250.58.146]:26617 "EHLO brutus.conectiva.com.br") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id ; Fri, 27 Oct 2000 14:06:42 -0400 Date: Fri, 27 Oct 2000 16:06:23 -0200 (BRDT) From: Rik van Riel To: Christopher Friesen cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: Somewhat different GPL Question In-Reply-To: <39F9C1C7.BDEFE414@nortelnetworks.com> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Fri, 27 Oct 2000, Christopher Friesen wrote: > If I use some GPL'd code and make calls from my software to the > GPL'd code, do I need to make *my* code available? Or would I > only have to make available any changes to the GPL'd code? > > Section 2.b of the GPL seems to indicate that I need to make the > source for my entire executable available if it incorporates any > GPL'd source, and that I cannot charge for the software, only > for its distribution. Is this correct? It depends. If you're making interprocess calls to call the GPL code, I suspect you won't have to make your code GPL. OTOH, if you /link/ against a GPL shared library, you will have to GPL the source of your program (that is, you'll have to give it to the people who receive the binary from you). Mind that lots of the "system" libraries are under the somewhat more free LPGL... regards, Rik -- "What you're running that piece of shit Gnome?!?!" -- Miguel de Icaza, UKUUG 2000 http://www.conectiva.com/ http://www.surriel.com/ - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/