Re: libguile and readline

[Greg Troxel <gdt@fnord.ir.bbn.com>]

  lalo@webcom.com said:

  Uh, wait. We're dealing with GNU software here - copyrights
  owned by FSF, and an important part of the GNU system. Licenses
  _are_ a major point.

Part of the point of guile is that it can be used to extend non-free
programs.  I believe this was a conscious decision on the part of the
FSF.  My reading of the licenses in libguile suppports this view.
(I think this decision was wise.  I'm using it to extend programs at
work, and the license terms on the copyright notices are X-like, not
GPL.)

  The guile _sources_ can be distributed on LGPL; but as soon as

I don't see this in the source; can you tell me what in file this is
present?  It says GPL, and including it in binaries doesn't cause the
binaries to be covered by the GPL.  From libguile/numbers.c

   * The exception is that, if you link the GUILE library with other files
   * to produce an executable, this does not by itself cause the
   * resulting executable to be covered by the GNU General Public License.
   * Your use of that executable is in no way restricted on account of
   * linking the GUILE library code into it.
   [and more..]

I believe that readline doesn't have this exemption, so the copying of
a binary that has guile and (statically linked) readline would be
restricted by whatever flavor of GPL is on the readline source.  If
the copyright holder of some other source used in the binary doesn't
grant permission to copy their source under the GPL, then the binary
simply can't be copied.  (As I said, the issue of dynamic linking and
copyright law is far from clear, and I don't want to get into that
flameware, since it doesn't serve the purpose of improving guile and
getting it in widespread use.).

        Greg Troxel <gdt@ir.bbn.com>