Date: Sun, 01 Dec 2002 20:03:28 -0800 From: Darren Pilgrim <dmp@pantherdragon.org> To: Kyle Martin <mkm@ieee.org> Cc: chat@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Is a port skeleton considered a derivative work under the GPL? Message-ID: <3DEADB90.3020206@pantherdragon.org> References: <3DE9A680.4000702@pantherdragon.org> <20021201004323.GD811@marvin.bsdng.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Kyle Martin wrote: > On Sat, Nov 30, 2002 at 10:04:48PM -0800, Darren Pilgrim wrote: >>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 > > we do it all the time, look at any of the thousands of ported GPL applications That's lemming logic, though. I'd rather check first. To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-chat" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?3DEADB90.3020206>