Re: Binary distributions [ was Re: [PROPOSAL] fix for bad Xrefs ... ]
Some time ago, Hrvoje Niksic wrote...
|+
| The GPL'ed code we are distributing is XEmacs itself, accompanied by
| all the sources. If I understand correctly what this InstallShield
| thing is, then it has nothing to do with XEmacs -- it's just yet
| another installation tool. Having it on the same CD as XEmacs well
| falls into the "mere aggregation" clause:
|
| In addition, mere aggregation of another work not based on the
| Program with the Program (or with a work based on the Program) on
| a volume of a storage or distribution medium does not bring the
| other work under the scope of this License.
|-
Ok, which components have to be GPLed then, in the case you install
and run XEmacs on your system:
1. FTP server sources from which you download XEmacs.
2. File system and network drivers used to transfer it (i.e.
is XEmacs "aggregated" into the file system?)
3. FTP proxy code at the interrnet provider side, if access goes
through the proxy.
4. Cisco and others router sofrware.
5. FTP client sources.
6. Filesystem drivers on the targer os
7. Hard disk and controller firmware, for the same reason.
If installshiled "Contains" XEmacs files, as long as installation
files, it has all the characterisics of the filesystem. If we or
lawyers or I do not know who will come to a conclusion that "containment"
of XEmacs, alogin whith non-free installation helper programs in a
non-free "entity" is illegal, then, sadly, the only way to store XEmacs
will be on a free OS, with free filesystem, and free hard firmware. The
latest hardly achievable, so pusjes XEmacs out of this universe.
To run it, we'll need free firmware of all hardware components used.
So, "containment" of XEmacs within a file system directorty is as
legal (or as illegal) as within an installshiled executable.
The concept of "containment" is not in GPL. This is not an
"aggregation",
nor "derivative work".
Kirill