From: Ian S. <ian...@fa...> - 2013-10-06 16:55:21
|
Aah I see! I knew there'd be a subtley I'd missed ;-) I will read up on whether cross-compilation has a licensing implication and act accordingly. Thanks for the hint (as usual!), Ian Fabian Keil <fk...@fa...> wrote: >"Ian Silvester" <ian...@fa...> wrote: > >> On Wed, 25 Sep 2013 13:40:18 -0400, Fabian Keil <fk...@fa...> >wrote: >> >> > "Ian Silvester" <ian...@fa...> wrote: >> > >> >> I've recently moved from an iPhone to an Android phone so do not >intend >> >> to >> >> continue development of the Privoxy for iPhone release building >module >> >> (iOSPackageBuilder). Here is the current status of the project: >> >> >> > [...] >> >> >> >> I would like to add the work in progress to CVS just in case >someone >> >> else >> >> takes up the baton down the line, and even think it worth >publishing the >> >> installer for download from Sourceforge (once the documentation >has been >> >> updated with relevant installation instructions for iOS). Given >the >> >> status >> >> described above, what do you all feel about this? >> > >> > Putting the work in progress into CVS seems reasonable to me. >> >> Thanks Fabian, will get onto it. >> >> > If distributing the installer binary doesn't violate the GPLv2 >> > (I didn't check), uploading it makes sense to me as well. >> >> I'm always a bit ignorant on the licensing front, but since the >installer >> is just a zip file how might that be more of a licensing concern >than, >> say, Apple's .pkg format as used on OS X? The only binary being >> distributed is Privoxy compiled for ARM - is that your concern? As >ever, >> apologies if I'm missing a wider issue (I often do where GPL is >> concerned!). > >The packaging format indeed shouldn't matter, but if you cross-compile >from OS X to iOS using a proprietary build environment the special >exception from § 3 GPLv2 probably doesn't apply anymore: > >| The source code for a work means the preferred form of the work for >| making modifications to it. For an executable work, complete source >| code means all the source code for all modules it contains, plus any >| associated interface definition files, plus the scripts used to >| control compilation and installation of the executable. However, as >a >| special exception, the source code distributed need not include >| anything that is normally distributed (in either source or binary >| form) with the major components (compiler, kernel, and so on) of the >| operating system on which the executable runs, unless that component >| itself accompanies the executable. > >I'm not familiar enough with building binaries for iOS to decide >whether >or not that's really a problem, though. If you come (or already came) >to the conclusion that it isn't, that's fine with me. > >Fabian > > >------------------------------------------------------------------------ > >------------------------------------------------------------------------------ >October Webinars: Code for Performance >Free Intel webinars can help you accelerate application performance. >Explore tips for MPI, OpenMP, advanced profiling, and more. Get the >most from >the latest Intel processors and coprocessors. See abstracts and >register > >http://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/clk?id=60134791&iu=/4140/ostg.clktrk > >------------------------------------------------------------------------ > >_______________________________________________ >Ijbswa-developers mailing list >Ijb...@li... >https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/ijbswa-developers -- Sent from my Android device with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity. |