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 IAA02644; Mon, 25 Oct 2004 08:09:10 +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 IAA02990 for ; Mon, 25 Oct 2004 08:09:09 +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 (8.13.0/8.13.0) with ESMTP id i9P6976b015119 for ; Mon, 25 Oct 2004 08:09:08 +0200 Received: from localhost (suiren.kurims.kyoto-u.ac.jp [130.54.16.25]) by kurims.kurims.kyoto-u.ac.jp (8.9.3p2-20030924/3.7W) with ESMTP id PAA17576; Mon, 25 Oct 2004 15:09:03 +0900 (JST) Date: Mon, 25 Oct 2004 15:08:55 +0900 (JST) Message-Id: <20041025.150855.13740131.garrigue@math.nagoya-u.ac.jp> To: caml-list@davidb.org Cc: caml-list@inria.fr Subject: Re: [Caml-list] Announce: Schoca-0.2.3 released From: Jacques Garrigue In-Reply-To: <20041025050127.GA3599@old.davidb.org> References: <20041025025832.GA1582@old.davidb.org> <20041025.123834.26988978.garrigue@math.nagoya-u.ac.jp> <20041025050127.GA3599@old.davidb.org> X-Mailer: Mew version 4.0.64 on Emacs 21.3 / Mule 5.0 (SAKAKI) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Miltered: at concorde with ID 417C9883.000 by Joe's j-chkmail (http://j-chkmail.ensmp.fr)! X-Loop: caml-list@inria.fr X-Spam: no; 0.00; caml-list:01 jacques:01 caml-list:01 gpl:01 gpl:01 qpl:01 insists:01 derivative:01 lgpl:01 argued:01 qpl:01 gpled:01 incompatible:01 jacques:01 linked:01 Sender: owner-caml-list@pauillac.inria.fr Precedence: bulk From: David Brown > > On the other hand, there should be no problem loading manually a > > GPL library in the toplevel, or building such a toplevel privately. > > (At least I believe so, but questions of dynamic loading are the > > muddiest part of the GPL and the QPL.) > > The GPL only coveres distribution, not execution. GPL code can be linked > with even proprietary code as long as the result isn't distributed at all. That's why I call it muddy. The FSF (who wrote the GPL) insists that dynamic linking creates a derivative work, while in that case the linking only occurs at execution. And this makes sense, because otherwise the GPL would say nothing more than the LGPL. Now, it could be argued that when you load code into the toplevel, this is not the toplevel that is using the code (it has no dependency on it). But this kind of argument can turn very subjective. Note also that the above problem is between the GPL and the QPL, which includes its own requirements. If you distribute a small modification of a GPLed library that uses some functions of the toplevel, but only when you link it with the toplevel, then (incompatible) requirements of both the GPL and the QPL will apply to this code. Confusing. Jacques Garrigue ------------------- To unsubscribe, mail caml-list-request@inria.fr Archives: http://caml.inria.fr Bug reports: http://caml.inria.fr/bin/caml-bugs FAQ: http://caml.inria.fr/FAQ/ Beginner's list: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/ocaml_beginners