[rescue] OT: Linux and USB on Intel
Charles Shannon Hendrix
shannon at widomaker.com
Wed Apr 23 11:06:32 CDT 2003
On Mon, Apr 21, 2003 at 10:47:47AM -0500, Scott Newell wrote:
> >> I disagree with those examples! For one, if you compile using GCC, chances
> >> are that you are linking to some of the GNU libs, therefore you are
> >> acutally including GNU code (via static or dynamic linkage) on your
> >> product. Therefore the distiction lines are quite blurred....
> >Not to a logical human.
> >If I write code, it's my code, regardless of what tools I used.
> >If I use a Craftsman hammer to build a house, its likely I used
> >Craftsman nails, saws, and screwdrivers too. The house is still my own
> What if you're writing embedded software and don't want to release the
> source? Gotta watch your libs.
I don't understand this in response to what I said.
My point was that GNU or the owner of some GPL code that I make use of
doesn't own my code, even if their stuff is 99% of the total.
Shell scripts that I write are probably under 1% of the code needed to
support them, but they still are mine, and not derivative works.
To answer your question, I'd use another license besides GPL or even BSD
if I didn't want to release sources. Probably a very specific license
based on BSD.
UNIX/Perl/C/Pizza____________________s h a n n o n at wido !SPAM maker.com
More information about the rescue