what was the point?

[John Cowan]

email at greglondon.com scripsit:

> the original situation was with regard to 
> linking GPL software. when you redistribute
> GPL software linked with other software,
> the other software must be GPL licensed as
> well.

No, it has to be freely distributable, not GPL.
A compiled Linux kernel is GPL, and so are
most of its parts, but some are under the BSD,
which is fine because that is a free distribution
license that imposes no extra restrictions above
the GPL.

-- 
John Cowan           http://www.ccil.org/~cowan              cowan at ccil.org
Please leave your values        |       Check your assumptions.  In fact,
   at the front desk.           |          check your assumptions at the door.
     --sign in Paris hotel      |            --Miles Vorkosigan
--
license-discuss archive is at http://crynwr.com/cgi-bin/ezmlm-cgi?3