Message from discussion Linux is a GNU system and the DWARF support
From: mar...@ee.pdx.edu (Marcus Daniels)
Subject: Re: Linux is a GNU system and the DWARF support
Date: 15 Sep 1994 13:30:15 GMT
Organization: Portland State University
References: <1994Sep8.email@example.com> <firstname.lastname@example.org>
In-reply-to: email@example.com's message of Thu, 15 Sep 1994 11:52:11 GMT
>>>>> "Alan" == Alan Cox <iia...@iifeak.swan.ac.uk> writes:
In article <Cw66Az....@info.swan.ac.uk> iia...@iifeak.swan.ac.uk (Alan Cox) writes:
Alan> - How do inline functions in include files related to the GPL
Alan> - What about structures from include files
Alan> - When is a dynamic link a dynamic link
Alan> A GPL v3 seems needed for at least one of these issues.
Indeed, it may be necessary to address these issues in a broad way.
However, it becomes easy to paint yourself into a corner by specifying legal
interpretations for each and every techinical convention. It is easy
to see why the FSF has avoided this level of detail.
The examples you cite are specific to the C/object-module
world. These terms don't apply so well to reflective development environments.
Developers should be able to tune the L/GPL to their personal intent, making
minor exceptions just as the FSF does. I think the way to do this is with
explicit agreements with users.