From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: (from majordomo@localhost) by pauillac.inria.fr (8.7.6/8.7.3) id LAA08965; Mon, 18 Jun 2001 11:48:47 +0200 (MET DST) X-Authentication-Warning: pauillac.inria.fr: majordomo set sender to owner-caml-list@pauillac.inria.fr using -f Received: from concorde.inria.fr (concorde.inria.fr [192.93.2.39]) by pauillac.inria.fr (8.7.6/8.7.3) with ESMTP id LAA02099 for ; Mon, 18 Jun 2001 11:48:46 +0200 (MET DST) Received: from kurims.kurims.kyoto-u.ac.jp (kurims.kurims.kyoto-u.ac.jp [130.54.16.1]) by concorde.inria.fr (8.11.1/8.10.0) with ESMTP id f5I9min01140; Mon, 18 Jun 2001 11:48:44 +0200 (MET DST) Received: from localhost (suiren.kurims.kyoto-u.ac.jp [130.54.16.25]) by kurims.kurims.kyoto-u.ac.jp (8.9.3/3.7W) with ESMTP id SAA14136; Mon, 18 Jun 2001 18:48:42 +0900 (JST) To: Xavier.Leroy@inria.fr Cc: caml-list@inria.fr Subject: Re: [Caml-list] Caml toplevel and readline In-Reply-To: <20010618093209.C12678@pauillac.inria.fr> References: <3B2796C1.9144F7AE@ozemail.com.au> <20010614154525K.garrigue@kurims.kyoto-u.ac.jp> <20010618093209.C12678@pauillac.inria.fr> X-Mailer: Mew version 1.94.2 on Emacs 20.7 / Mule 4.0 (HANANOEN) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-Id: <20010618184841N.garrigue@kurims.kyoto-u.ac.jp> Date: Mon, 18 Jun 2001 18:48:41 +0900 From: Jacques Garrigue X-Dispatcher: imput version 20000228(IM140) Sender: owner-caml-list@pauillac.inria.fr Precedence: bulk Whow, even Xavier wants to have fun interpreting the GPL. > > No. Gnu-readline is a well-known example of library released under the > > GPL, which makes it incompatible with the caml toplevel, which is > > covered by the QPL :-) > > Waitaminute. The Caml toplevel doesn't *link* with the Caml runtime > system and bytecode interpreter -- just like a shell script doesn't link > with the Bash shell. > > That is, we have a piece of LGPL'd C code (the Caml bytecode > interpreter and runtime system) that links with whatever C libraries > happen to be LGPL-compatible and interprets bytecode for a QPL'd > program (the toplevel) produced by a QPL'd compiler (ocamlc). > What can possibly be wrong with that? As long as you distribute the special runtime containing readline separately from the toplevel, this reasoning is OK. But the first man making a custom toplevel is dead: having both in the same file won't do. Even distributing libreadline inside the ocaml distribution might be a problem: the intent of using readline inside the toplevel is clear enough that the whole thing can be seen as a whole work (cf paragraph 2b). > (Unless a GPL'd library cannot be linked with a LGPL'd program, which > would be a surprise to me, but you never know with those FSF licenses :-) I don't know either :-) Best regards, Jacques Garrigue ------------------- Bug reports: http://caml.inria.fr/bin/caml-bugs FAQ: http://caml.inria.fr/FAQ/ To unsubscribe, mail caml-list-request@inria.fr Archives: http://caml.inria.fr