Linked by Thom Holwerda on Sun 22nd Jul 2007 14:17 UTC, submitted by Oliver
GCC 4.2.1 has been released, the last release of the GNU Compiler Collection under the GPL v2. "GCC 4.2.1 is a bug-fix release, containing fixes for regressions in GCC 4.2.0 relative to previous GCC releases. GCC 4.2.1 will be the last release of GCC covered by version 2 of the GNU General Public License. All future releases will be released under GPL version 3."
Thread beginning with comment 257339
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
Member since:2007-02-17
No. modified GPL software running on a server is not being redistributed. So there is no requirement to supply the modified code.
In the same way that if you modified the Open Office source code for personal use, then wrote letters using it, you would not have to publish your modifications.
(Of course, it would be nice to do so)
In the same way that if you modified the Open Office source code for personal use, then wrote letters using it, you would not have to publish your modifications.
(Of course, it would be nice to do so)
Meh. This is a borderline case.
You could also argue (from the opposite viewpoint) that the client users are in effect "running" the code on the server, whereas people who read letters are not running OpenOffice.org in any way.
Member since:2006-06-03
So should Google be forced to GPL the sources to GFS?
because it is (presumably) a Linux kernel module running on publically accesible servers. Clients who search using google, or use google maps are using the GFS drivers to access data. By your argument, that makes it subject to the redistribution terms of the GPL.
It gets a little hard to judge these cases!
Recent Original Stories
Recent Comments
Headlines
Random Comments
Random Stories
Random OS Link
Member since:
2006-06-03
No. modified GPL software running on a server is not being redistributed. So there is no requirement to supply the modified code.
In the same way that if you modified the Open Office source code for personal use, then wrote letters using it, you would not have to publish your modifications.
(Of course, it would be nice to do so)