From owner-freebsd-chat Sat Nov 30 22:50: 9 2002 Delivered-To: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C21AC37B401 for ; Sat, 30 Nov 2002 22:50:07 -0800 (PST) Received: from scaup.mail.pas.earthlink.net (scaup.mail.pas.earthlink.net [207.217.120.49]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 602B243EDC for ; Sat, 30 Nov 2002 22:50:07 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from tlambert2@mindspring.com) Received: from pool0190.cvx22-bradley.dialup.earthlink.net ([209.179.198.190] helo=mindspring.com) by scaup.mail.pas.earthlink.net with esmtp (Exim 3.33 #1) id 18INvZ-0004WO-00; Sat, 30 Nov 2002 22:50:05 -0800 Message-ID: <3DE9B0CC.8A368E61@mindspring.com> Date: Sat, 30 Nov 2002 22:48:44 -0800 From: Terry Lambert X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.79 [en] (Win98; U) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Darren Pilgrim Cc: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Is a port skeleton considered a derivative work under the GPL? References: <3DE9A680.4000702@pantherdragon.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk List-ID: List-Archive: (Web Archive) List-Help: (List Instructions) List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: X-Loop: FreeBSD.org Darren Pilgrim wrote: > I'm planning on making a port skeleton for a GPL'd program. I can't, > though, figure out if I have to GPL the port skeleton or not. If the > skeleton is just the basic wrapper Makefile and uses the entire contents > of the original tarball verbatim, the skeleton is the equivalent of an > external start-up script and thus outside the scope of the original > license, right? What if I need to include patches or replace the > original Makefiles to get a clean build and install? Do those patches > and replacements have to be GPL'd? I've read the GPL, and all I gained > is a state of confusion. IANAL, I guess. You are basically asking the question "What makes A a derivative work of B?". Please see: http://www.pbwt.com/Attorney/files/ravicher_1.pdf For a lawyer's take on the subject, with regard to Open Source Software. See also: http://www.law.duke.edu/copyright/copykids/definitions.html#derivativework IMO: o The skeleton is _not_ a derivative work o The patches *are* a derivative work (thre represent deltas against the original code, and would preferrably "go away", so that the code would compile on FreeBSD without modification) o Replacement Makefiles are not derivative, but you might as well make them GPL, since they aren't useful without the code that it compiles. In general, replacements shouldn't be necessary; probably, you need to install "bash" and "gmake" and perhaps other code as package dependencies, instead, to avoid the rewrite. -- Terry To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-chat" in the body of the message