chopps@emunix.emich.edu (Chris Hopps) wrote:
> [Olaf Rhialto Seibert, i.e., me, wrote:]
> > It can be argued that a dynamically linked executable is in fact
> > exactly "complete object files", which can be "relink[ed] with the
> > library, after making changes to the library and recompiling it."
> 
> Hmm I don't know much about the GPL however I can tell you that LKM's
> might as well be executables.  If LKM's are covered by the GPL then

Note that I'm talking here about dynamically linked executables (which
need some LGPL-ed library), not about LKMs which are themselves covered
by the GPL. The cases may be somewhat similar, but aren't.

> > And personally, I don't find the concept of the GPL that bad. Most of
> > my recent AmigaOS software is GPLed, just because it is (supposed to
> > be) a discouraging restriction for people who want to make money off my
> > personal efforts. And if I like, I can always re-release my software
> 
> The GPL does no such thing.  On the amiga where the practice of not
> selling source abounds in the commercial market, the GPL happens to
> seem to have this side affect.  However Many companies sell GNU software.

I suppose that those companies really sell the support and/or the media
on which the software comes, and throw in the actual software for free.
If not, their clients are rather stupid to pay for something that's can
be had for free. But for the support they certainly deserve to be paid.

> > -Olaf.
> Chris.
-Olaf.
--
___ Olaf 'Rhialto' Seibert       D787B44DFC896063 4CBB95A5BD1DAA96
\X/ There are no lemurs in this post	      rhialto@mbfys.kun.nl


------------------------------------------------------------------------------