Re: Qt Xemacs ??

On Thursday 02 May 2002 12:12, Simon Josefsson wrote: > On Thu, 2 May 2002, David Faure wrote: > > On Thursday 02 May 2002 10:08, Simon Josefsson wrote: > > > On 2 May 2002, Stephen J. Turnbull wrote: > > > > >>>>> "PB" == rendhalver <rendhalver(a)xemacs.org&gt; writes: > > > > > > > > PB> i was under the impression that you do need to use qt for > > > > KDE PB> apps or is there some kind of funky abstraction thingy > > > > which PB> lets you get around it some how ?? > > > > > > > > You do probably _link_ (indirectly) to Qt (see below). But what > > > > these guys are saying is that XEmacs probably only needs to do > > > > #include <kde/kpart.H>. Since KDE is already GPL, they have > > > > already taken care of the legal issues. (NB. If they got the > > > > legalities wrong, rms would make us a codefendent with KDE anyway. > > > > ;-) > > > > > > Even if KDE has an exemption for linking with QT (which I assume it > > > does, since someone ported KDE to Windows, I believe), XEmacs would > > > also have to have the exemption (which it won't have, from what I > > > gatter). KDE links with OpenSSL, so I don't think we should trust > > > them to do the legalities right. > > > > You are very mistaken when it comes to licensing issues in KDE, I'm > > afraid. 1) KDE has no exception for linking with Qt. Qt *is* GPL, for > > god's sake. > > Qt/Windows is not GPL, isn't the (alleged) KDE port to Windows using > Qt/Windows? If so, and if the port is distributed, KDE must have an > exception in the GPL saying it is OK to link with Qt/Windows. This is > just speculation (I haven't seen KDE/windows), so please correct me if > I'm wrong. The KDE port to Windows uses cygwin AFAIK - i.e. *not* Qt/Windows.

> > 2) KDE does not link with openSSL (anymore). We dlopen it. > > Is this ok with FSF? The difference between linking at compile time and > runtime seems like splitting hairs. But if it's OK with FSF, then it's > OK... (and if so, I'd say the ban on linking is pretty useless, everyone > can just dlopen() instead.) IANAL, please contact pour(a)kde.org for any precise licensing questions (although this one might be a more general GPL issue). I don't know, I was simply correcting your statement that KDE is linking to openssl. > Maybe turning emacs into an XPart is the way to go. Sounds great to me, if you get this to work. I'd give anything (err, almost ;) for an XEmacs part in kdevelop.

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.0.6 (GNU/Linux) Comment: For info see http://www.gnupg.org iD8DBQE80dD8x2Sktruwba0RAuXHAJ9Bo+ok7WMyOjFNF9KuptSbbedq6QCfeghE 8H/lEyLP2zYaneDidZT0y2M= =wzjR -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----