Re: gpl, gdb and wigglers.dll

[Baurjan Ismagulov <ibr at gantek dot com>]

Hi,

I've just re-read GPL v2, and I can't see the point behind the discussion: as far as I could understand, the presense of an interface to wigglers.dll in gdb sources does not violate GPL as long as wigglers.dll is not distributed with gdb (as a "major component of the operating system on which the executable runs", article 3) and interface between wigglers.dll and any program using it is not patented (article 7; this does not seem to be the case).

In short, I don't think the practice of developing interfaces to proprietary systems violates GPL, and I would even like to encourage it.

So, could you please enlighten me:

Aleksey:
	Why do you think this is "wigglers-specific exclusion from GPL requirements"? Again, I can't see how this violates GPL requirements.

Stan:
> However, in retrospect, I made a mistake in deciding to include
> ser-ocd.c.  The problem is that with an unspecified interface
> between PC and wiggler, and with the wiggler dll only available in
> binary form for certain platforms (correct me if I'm wrong here),
> you have the situation that the GPL was supposed to prevent, namely
> that you can't fix a problem in the driver, use it with a different
> operating system, etc.  For instance, if I get a Mac with a parallel
> port, I can't use the wiggler I already bought, no matter whether I run
> LinuxPPC or OS X.  Even a minor Linux or Windows upgrade could render
> my wiggler useless.

	Why do you think inability to fix a problem in wigglers.dll is supposed to be prevented by GPL? In the end, that is the problem with the dll, not with gdb? IMHO, GPL is not supposed to encourage the development of, say, GPLed version of Windows 2000.

	Could you please also explain OS upgrade case rendering your wigglers.dll useless in more detail? This is completely obscure for me.

Tom:
	Why do you think this code is GPL violation and should be removed?

Regards,
Baurjan.

On Tue, May 08, 2001 at 12:33:09PM -0600, Tom Tromey wrote:
> >>>>> ">" == Quality Quorum <qqi@world.std.com> writes:
> 
> >> Again, I am trying to make a long term decision wrt using of GPL'ed
> >> code and I am trying to come to grips what is (going to be)
> >> permited and what not.
> 
> Your best bet in this case is to ask RMS.  He is usually the arbiter
> of the meaning of the GPL for GNU programs.  When required he also has
> legal experts to help him.
> 
> FWIW I think this code is a GPL violation and should be removed.
> 
> Tom