[Freeciv-Dev] Re: KCiv?

[Trent Piepho <xyzzy@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

On Thu, 9 Aug 2001, Gaute B Strokkenes wrote:
> That's imprecise.  People (rightly) bitched that the GPL and the old
> Qt license are incompatible.  To be more precise, if you create a work
> that is a derived work of a number of components, you must respect the
> licenses of all the works involved if you wish to distribute it.

But does porting software to use a widget library create a derived work?  I
don't think so.  You might as well say that the gtk/windows port of freeciv is
a derived work of microsoft's libraries, because it links with them.

> > You are not allowed to distribute a GPLed program that requires
> > other closed source software to compile, unless that software is
> > part of the OS.  For some unknown reason that seems rather
> > hypocritical to me, microsoft's compilers and libraries, or the
> > Motif widget library, are part of the OS and ok.
> 
> Motif is part of most commerical unixes, but is not part of any
> GNU/Linux or BSD that I know of.  So you could write GPLed programs
> for commercial unixes that uses Motif, but not Linux programs.  It's

That doesn't make any sense what so ever.  I compiled a GPLed program that
requires motif called xmcd on linux.  Was it ok for people to distribute
xmcd's source before I compiled it on linux?  Can people distribute the source
to xmcd with the disclaimer that you aren't allowed to use it on Linux or any
other operating system that doesn't come standard with motif libraries?

What if I release a Linux distro called LandLocked that doesn't come with a C
library.  I make people buy another package called CoastLine in order to get a
C library.  Since nearly every piece of GPL software requires a C library, and
my OS doesn't come with one, is all that GPL software now violating the GPL? 
It require a component that isn't part of my OS.

> > So that and worrying about microprose suing them made whoever did
> > the qt port give up.  Maybe now that QT is open source ok and RMS
> > has "forgiven"
> 
> You may wish to have a look at the following part of the GPL "Any
> attempt otherwise to copy, modify, sublicense or distribute the
> Program is void, and will automatically terminate your rights under
> this license."  That is why this is necessary.

I know that.  Why do you think I mentioned it?