From owner-cvs-src@FreeBSD.ORG Fri May 23 16:38:30 2008 Return-Path: Delivered-To: cvs-src@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 807B9106566C for ; Fri, 23 May 2008 16:38:30 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from peter@wemm.org) Received: from an-out-0708.google.com (an-out-0708.google.com [209.85.132.243]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 373488FC1B for ; Fri, 23 May 2008 16:38:30 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from peter@wemm.org) Received: by an-out-0708.google.com with SMTP id b33so171492ana.13 for ; Fri, 23 May 2008 09:38:29 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.100.190.15 with SMTP id n15mr2430445anf.107.1211560709073; Fri, 23 May 2008 09:38:29 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.100.8.6 with HTTP; Fri, 23 May 2008 09:38:28 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: Date: Fri, 23 May 2008 09:38:28 -0700 From: "Peter Wemm" To: "M. Warner Losh" In-Reply-To: <20080521.211110.-749259186.imp@bsdimp.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline References: <200805220214.m4M2EYTM061847@repoman.freebsd.org> <20080521.211110.-749259186.imp@bsdimp.com> Cc: cvs-src@freebsd.org, jb@freebsd.org, src-committers@freebsd.org, cvs-all@freebsd.org Subject: Re: cvs commit: src/lib/libdwarf Makefile _libdwarf.h dwarf.h dwarf_abbrev.c dwarf_attr.c dwarf_attrval.c dwarf_cu.c dwarf_dealloc.c dwarf_die.c dwarf_dump.c dwarf_errmsg.c dwarf_errno.c dwarf_finish.c dwarf_form.c dwarf_init.c dwarf_loc.c ... X-BeenThere: cvs-src@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: CVS commit messages for the src tree List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 23 May 2008 16:38:30 -0000 On Wed, May 21, 2008 at 8:11 PM, M. Warner Losh wrote: > In message: <200805220214.m4M2EYTM061847@repoman.freebsd.org> > John Birrell writes: > : The API for this library is deliberately different to the GPL'd > : libdwarf to avoid licensing problems. > > What licensing problems does it avoid? APIs can't be copyrighted, and > therefore can't be GPL'd. > > Warner Well.. the GNU and linux folk have an interesting spin on this. They seem to maintain that if an API is specific to a GPL'ed code blob, then programs that use that specific API are therefore derivatives. There was a case a few years ago about the gmp library. They maintained that a 3rd party consumer of libgmp was a GPL violation if it wasn't distributed under GPL compatible terms. I seem to recall that the 'fgmp' (free-gmp) library came out, and a new release of the 3rd party package was made with the references in the documentation changed to something like 'uses fgmp or a fgmp-compatible library like gmp' or some such. It was all a giant circus and waste of effort, especially since fgmp wasn't really a viable gmp replacement. The next point is that the Linux folks (including Linus) seem to consider that making calls to the linux kernel causes your driver to be a derivative, unless the API you're calling has been blessed as a public interface. (To be fair, I can see the point for their specific circumstances, but their interpretation of copyright seems to be quite a stretch to me). Back to this case. There are non-GPL implementations of libdwarf out there. I think the API is well and truly fair game at this point. -- Peter Wemm - peter@wemm.org; peter@FreeBSD.org; peter@yahoo-inc.com "All of this is for nothing if we don't go to the stars" - JMS/B5 "If Java had true garbage collection, most programs would delete themselves upon execution." -- Robert Sewell