Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Fri, 27 Oct 2000 16:55:23 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Fri, 27 Oct 2000 16:55:12 -0400 Received: from lightning.swansea.linux.org.uk ([194.168.151.1]:11124 "EHLO the-village.bc.nu") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id ; Fri, 27 Oct 2000 16:55:06 -0400 Subject: Re: Somewhat different GPL Question To: riel@conectiva.com.br (Rik van Riel) Date: Fri, 27 Oct 2000 21:49:44 +0100 (BST) Cc: cfriesen@nortelnetworks.com (Christopher Friesen), linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org In-Reply-To: from "Rik van Riel" at Oct 27, 2000 04:06:23 PM X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.5 PL1] MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-Id: From: Alan Cox Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org > 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). The out of court settlements don't actually bear up to this interpretation and have been more about 'depending on' as a definition for linking and what is and is not an entire application. Its one reason Im glad Linus had the sense to put an explicit statement about syscalls in the kernel COPYING file. - 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/