From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1D7nlq-0004g3-Mi for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Sat, 05 Mar 2005 23:53:38 -0500 Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1D7nlo-0004ez-Li for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Sat, 05 Mar 2005 23:53:37 -0500 Received: from [199.232.76.173] (helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1D7nlo-0004e7-7I for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Sat, 05 Mar 2005 23:53:36 -0500 Received: from [69.17.117.29] (helo=mail27.sea5.speakeasy.net) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (TLSv1:DES-CBC3-SHA:168) (Exim 4.34) id 1D7nTU-0004HI-Fv for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Sat, 05 Mar 2005 23:34:40 -0500 Received: from dsl081-088-222.lax1.dsl.speakeasy.net (HELO [192.168.111.2]) ([64.81.88.222]) (envelope-sender ) by mail27.sea5.speakeasy.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP for ; 6 Mar 2005 04:34:38 -0000 Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] Re: Sponsorship for QEMU Developers... From: "John R. Hogerhuis" In-Reply-To: <20050306034737.GA11680@jbrown.mylinuxbox.org> References: <4228C0D9.8000601@win4lin.com> <200503051413.36906.os2@videotron.ca> <422A325B.1090301@win4lin.com> <422A6F69.30808@win4lin.com> <1110079971.1913.931.camel@aragorn> <20050306034737.GA11680@jbrown.mylinuxbox.org> Content-Type: text/plain Date: Sat, 05 Mar 2005 20:37:19 -0800 Message-Id: <1110083839.12889.5.camel@aragorn> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Reply-To: jhoger@pobox.com, qemu-devel@nongnu.org List-Id: qemu-devel.nongnu.org List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: qemu-devel@nongnu.org On Sat, 2005-03-05 at 22:47 -0500, Jim C. Brown wrote: > Qemu is NOT GPL!!! > > Qemu is NOT GPL!!! > > Qemu is NOT GPL!!! > > qemu-user is GPL. But as Leo stated, he doesn't use qemu-user. > OK, I agree with you there. So many licenses involved. But yes, I'm wrong. Color me confused, but Leo made the point that he is avoiding including any header files and instead dynamically linking. Why bother if the pieces in question are LGPLed or even better for him BSD'ed? Talk of code "contamination," etc. > So legally, he is in the clear. > Apparently! -- John.