Re: Emacs contributions, C and Lisp

[David Kastrup]

Jacob Bachmeyer <address@hidden> writes:

> David Kastrup wrote:
>> Jacob Bachmeyer <address@hidden> writes:
>>   
>>> Emacs is GPL, so it can call into GCC through Guile with no problem.
>>> A proprietary tool doing the same gets dropped right into a copyright
>>> quagmire.
>>>     
>>
>> Not if it does just the same as Emacs since that means it uses a
>> generically useful interface.
>>
>>   
> It has been a while since I last read through the FSF GPL FAQs on
> this, so maybe copyright has been weakened, but I thought that dynamic
> linking does not avoid the GPL.

Exactly.  And neither does it imply "the GPL", namely the deduction that
both programs form an inseparable whole.  We are dynamically linking a
number of image libraries into Emacs, and do so even at runtime on
Windows.  That does not mean that they suddenly are licensed
differently.

> Guile bindings for operations on GCC's GENERIC tree would be broadly
> useful, but I thought that they would also be indisputably derived
> from GCC, and any program written to use them would likewise be seen
> as deriving from GCC?  Has this reach of copyright been reduced?  Or
> have I always been mistaken?

I should think the latter.  That was the reason for the GCC plugin wars.

-- 
David Kastrup