2 Aug
2009
2 Aug
'09
7:59 p.m.
keller wrote:
On Aug 2, 2009, at 1:53 PM, Jörn Nettingsmeier wrote:
i'm pretty sure you can use anything you want (or nothing at all).
reasoning:
1. you are distributing third-party gpl code. make sure that it's
installable on its own, don't remove its build and install scripts.
2. you are distributing your own software, as-is, with a license of your
choice. nobody can force you to add installation or build scripts. what
if you aren't using any and compiling and linking by hand?
i'm not a lawyer (and also not interested in arguing the case). further
discussions and inquiries are probably best directed at the FSF.
my point was that it's totally misguided to accuse somebody who is
opening their original software under the gpl of non-compliance on the
grounds of not also providing build and install scripts for this
original software.
keller wrote:
As I am hearing now then, I can use install4j as long as I provide the
install4j script (but not install4j itself) in the source repository. On Aug 2, 2009, at 12:50 PM, Raymond Martin
wrote:
as stated in another mail, this is hogwash. you are perfectly entitled
to chose whatever build tool you want, without having to redistribute
it. just be careful that all the third-party software you include has
the original build files included.
I am referring to the Launch4J scripts to build
an executable and
others.
For example, you have an .exe for windows, isn't Launch4J what was
used?
If so, there is a script for it, as indicated in the build.xml.
As stated before, launch4j is a commercial product that I was using on
a trial version. There is no way that I can provide that. I was
considering buying it if worked well, but even then, I cannot provide
it.
All it does is wrap the .jar file and other dirs to make it convenient
for the users to install and launch. So I guess you're saying it's not
allowed?