Fedora and the System Administrator
fds at sdsc.edu
Thu Oct 2 17:23:25 UTC 2003
On Wednesday, October 1, 2003, at 06:23 AM, Bill Anderson wrote:
> -> Download the SRPMS
>  Funny (in a good way) thing, RH goes *beyond* the GPL requirements
> by making these available. Outside of stripping those, there is no
> getting around needing to pay a license fee for those bits.
What percentage of the RPM spec files are GPL'd? As I understand it, a
1. Source tarball
3. Spec file.
Of course 1, 2 must be disclosed publicly by the legal definition of
GPL. The spec file is interesting, if it was derived from one provided
by the package authors (not redhat) then it must be dislosed. If it was
originally GPL'd by redhat in an earlier release, and a derivation is
used in the current RHEL product, it must be disclosed (you cant un-GPL
your software). There may be some other cases with a different outcome.
Rocks Cluster Group, San Diego Supercomputing Center, CA
More information about the users