Linked by Thom Holwerda on Wed 13th Jun 2007 10:30 UTC, submitted by Francis Kuntz
KDE "Ars Technica sat down today to talk with KHTML developer and Trolltech employee, Lars Knoll. We talked about his involvement in the project that ultimately became the HTML rendering engine for Apple's Safari web browser, as well how Apple's involvement has shaped the future of web browsing for browsers on just about every platform imaginable."
Thread beginning with comment 247621
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE: Please clear a doubt
by MightyPenguin on Wed 13th Jun 2007 17:23 UTC in reply to "Please clear a doubt"
Member since:

Yes it's somewhat confusing to non software developers.

Basically it's like this: (many people believe) you can have GPL code and proprietary mixed together as long as they are modularized into libraries with seemingly static boundaries. On windows this would be DLLs.

So you could perhaps have a GPL DLL for handling say, drawing PNGs. And a proprietary DLL for handling BMPs. Your image editing app (like photoshop) which uses both of these could be proprietary or GPL without (as many believe) breaking the law.

Reply Parent Score: 1

RE[2]: Please clear a doubt
by smitty on Wed 13th Jun 2007 18:33 in reply to "RE: Please clear a doubt"
smitty Member since:

Apparently it is somewhat confusing to everyone, because as far as i know that is incorrect. That was the whole reason to create the LGPL license wasn't it? Which is what KHTML uses, so Apple only had to release the changes they made to it and not the rest of their application.

or even all the OS X source code?

That's easy - you only have to release the code that is directly linked to the GPL code. Calling a system call in the kernel doesn't count since that is more like passing a message to another piece of software rather than integrating that software directly into your own. That's why you can run proprietary apps on Linux and GPL apps on Windows, because they are considered seperate works and not extensions of the other.

Edited 2007-06-13 18:36

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[3]: Please clear a doubt
by zlynx on Wed 13th Jun 2007 19:32 in reply to "RE[2]: Please clear a doubt"
zlynx Member since:

From a legal point of view, there is no difference between calling functions in a DLL and using system calls.

Indeed, with the fast system call techniques, where any call to a special memory page (the VDSO) is a jump into kernel code, there is no technical difference either.

The only thing that makes the GPL "contaminate" library users is if the user is a "derived work". If the program has to use that one and only library, it is probably derived. If it can use different libraries without changes, then it is probably not derived, and doesn't have to be GPL.

Reply Parent Score: 3