*BSD News Article 14758


Return to BSD News archive

Xref: sserve comp.os.linux:35121 comp.os.386bsd.questions:1775
Newsgroups: comp.os.linux,comp.os.386bsd.questions
Path: sserve!newshost.anu.edu.au!munnari.oz.au!news.Hawaii.Edu!ames!agate!howland.reston.ans.net!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!menudo.uh.edu!uuneo!sugar!peter
From: peter@NeoSoft.com (Peter da Silva)
Subject: Re: Summary of Linux vs. 386BSD vs. Commercial Unixes
Organization: NeoSoft Communications Services -- (713) 684-5900
Date: Tue, 20 Apr 1993 01:49:54 GMT
Message-ID: <C5rEF7.n11@sugar.neosoft.com>
References: <C5qCnn.5Kw@sugar.neosoft.com> <1qugu1$g30@usenet.INS.CWRU.Edu>
Lines: 20

In article <1qugu1$g30@usenet.INS.CWRU.Edu> damien@b63519.student.cwru.edu (Damien Neil) writes:
> <Groan> Why am I following up to this thread?

I dunno. Have you been following it?

> Are you saying that code produced by a GPL compiler is forced to be under the
> GPL?

Obviously not. I was talking about toolkits. It's a third party who brought
in Microsoft's old (and long discarded) claim on the output of a compiler.

And linking in a GPL library *is* the same as using any other GPL code in
your program, unless that particular library was put under the GNU library
copyright... a document created relatively recently under pressure like
this.
-- 
Peter da Silva.  <peter@sugar.neosoft.com>.
 `-_-'   Oletko halannut suttasi tänään?
  'U`    
Tarjoilija, tämä ateria elää vielä.