From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
---|---|
To: | Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us> |
Cc: | Magnus Hagander <mha(at)sollentuna(dot)net>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: psql & readline & win32 |
Date: | 2006-02-13 18:19:46 |
Message-ID: | 2980.1139854786@sss.pgh.pa.us |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us> writes:
> Tom Lane wrote:
>>> At that point, psql becomes GPL, no question.
>>
>> Which means it's not happening, no?
> To clearify, I meant the psql binary becomes GPL.
There is no such thing as "the binary becomes GPL". GPL applies to
the source code.
> When we build psql with readline, which is our default on many
> platforms, we are already be GPL'ing psql, at least according to the
> copyright holders, FSF.
No, we are NOT doing that, not even according to FSF. Our usage of
a pre-installed readline library falls under this exception in the
standard GPL terms:
However, as a
special exception, the source code distributed need not include
anything that is normally distributed (in either source or binary
form) with the major components (compiler, kernel, and so on) of the
operating system on which the executable runs, unless that component
itself accompanies the executable.
When we link to a readline library that is normally present on the
target system, we do not become covered by the GPL, because of this
exception. But shipping readline in our package would be a flat
violation of the GPL unless we are willing to relicense.
regards, tom lane
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Thomas Hallgren | 2006-02-13 18:20:37 | Re: User Defined Types in Java |
Previous Message | Bruce Momjian | 2006-02-13 18:09:57 | Re: psql & readline & win32 |