Ralf Corsepius wrote:
On Thu, 2006-01-19 at 01:58 -0600, Mike McCarty wrote:
Ralf Corsepius wrote:
On Thu, 2006-01-19 at 00:34 -0600, Mike McCarty wrote:
STYMA, ROBERT E (ROBERT) wrote:
I seem to remember that libc.so is LGPL, so that takes care of
the "hello world" program.
That about sums it up. I have never released a commercial program
for Linux, and probably never will. Mostly because Linux is not
Linux, but rather Linux+GNU, and all of GNU is GPL or LGPL.
Linux per se is not the problem, the problem is that *building*
for Linux uses GNU, which, like all FSF stuff, is GPL or LGPL,
both of which are highly infective (though LGPL is slighly less
Non-sense. The Linux glibc's and other fundamental system libraries'
licenses (e.g. libstdc++) have been carefully chosen to allow this case.
I'm starting to get annoyed by this.
Feel free to do so, ... I would not have replied to this thread, if I
wouldn't think you are spreading FUD.
EOT - I am not going to continue this thread.
Right, when challenged to put up or shut up, you shut up, because
you are wrong. I see that you cut the parts of real substance out
of the message and did not respond to them, like a coward. Not fear,
not uncertainty, not doubt, but certainty, and truth are what I put
into my message. The [L]GPL are both intentionally incompatible
with commercial software based upon trade secrets. This is explicitly
mentioned in the [L]GPL themselves. Richard Stallman believes that
commercial software with trade secrets in them are somehow
morally wrong, and he set out to build a system which would not
have and could not have any trade secrets in it. This system he
called GNU, and he created the GPL and later the LGPL to enforce
his view of the world on all who would use the source created
by the so-called self-styled FSF.
If you are a Utopian, and have a sugar daddy to feed you, or
have another job and like contributing to charity causes,
or just like living in poverty, this is fine. If you like to
eat while making a living developing software, it stinks.
I happen to object to the GPL and LGPL on philosophical as well
as practical grounds, and have never used either. I am not a stingy
old curmudgeon with miserly intent and no feeling for my fellow
man, so I have, on occasion, created truly open source software,
by donating it to the PUBLIC DOMAIN, which is what one could call
TRUE FREE SOFTWARE, unlike that produced by the self-styled "Free
Software Foundation", which wants a pretty tight death grip on
its source, and yours, too.
In fact, I recently published some software either here, or
on Debian, I forget, to help a guy with a problem he had with
some files. I wrote a little program and put the source into
the public domain.
This message made from 100% recycled bits.
You have found the bank of Larn.
I can explain it for you, but I can't understand it for you.
I speak only for myself, and I am unanimous in that!