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.