Path: utzoo!utgpu!attcan!uunet!husc6!mailrus!eecae!raisch
From: raisch@eecae.UUCP (Rob Raisch)
Newsgroups: comp.lang.c++
Subject: Re: general class definitions
Message-ID: <10482@eecae.UUCP>
Date: 3 Aug 88 16:29:14 GMT
References: <8340@drutx.ATT.COM>
Organization: Engineering, Michigan State U., E. Lansing MI
Lines: 34

In article <8340@drutx.ATT.COM>, clive@drutx.ATT.COM (Clive Steward) says:
> 
> From article <1988Jul25.194637.22208@utzoo.uucp>, by henry@utzoo.uucp (Henry Spencer):
>> In article <6590058@hplsla.HP.COM> glenne@hplsla.HP.COM (           Glenn Engel) writes:
>>>  ... This will require you to offer for copying
>>>  costs, all your source code.  I would like to see this restriction
>>>  removed from libg++ so that it indeed will grow and grOW and GROW to
>>>  be usable by everyone.

[Other responses deleted.]

Ok, once and for all, I would like to know just what the FSF policies
are!  Here are a few questions that I hope someone might be able to
answer:
	1.	I use G++ to develop an application.  Do I have the
	right to sell the application without supplying source?

	2.	I use GDB to debug a recalcitrant application.  Do I
	have the right to sell the application without supplying source?

	3.	I use libg++ within an application.  Do I have the right
	to sell the application without supplying source?

	4.	Re: question #3, what source must I supply?  Just the
	libg++ source or by including it in my application do I `taint'
	everything that I have written? 

I sincerely agree with the efforts and philosophy of the Free Software
Foundation, but I was under the impression that it was `system software'
that should be `free, like air...', not the fruits of the application
programmer.  Perhaps I have misunderstood........

Robert Raisch - Case Center, Michigan State University.
--- raisch@eecae.ee.msu.edu or {backbones}!msudoc!raisch ---