Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!epiwrl!epimass!jbuck
From: jbuck@epimass.EPI.COM (Joe Buck)
Newsgroups: comp.binaries.ibm.pc.d
Subject: Re: Re: v01i222: gnuegrep...
Keywords: read gnu copying agreement before complaining
Message-ID: <2985@epimass.EPI.COM>
Date: 20 Mar 89 02:22:30 GMT
References: <7574@killer.Dallas.TX.US>
Reply-To: jbuck@epimass.EPI.COM (Joe Buck)
Organization: Entropic Processing, Inc., Cupertino, CA
Lines: 24



From jbuck@epimass.EPI.COM Fri Mar 17 11:56:27 1989
>>Rahul, I suggest you read the GNU software license carefully before
>>distributing binaries made from any more GNU stuff.  As I understand it,
>>if you also distribute source and you include a copy of the GNU license
>>you're legit.

In article <7574@killer.Dallas.TX.US> dono@killer.Dallas.TX.US (Don OConnell) writes:
>Joe I suggest that you read the agreement before you go shooting off your
>mouth, Your foot might not taste so good. (Open mouth un_insert foot.) :)

Sorry, Don, I won't insert my foot.  You're reading my comment
beginning with "if you also distribute..." to mean "if and only if".
Since that's not what I said, you may insert your own foot.  Yes, it's
also OK if you offer to mail source, or tell where sources can be
gotten, but none of these were done, and the GNU license wasn't
included.  It's a simple matter to fix this problem: just include a
reference to where the sources can be obtained.  A copy of the GNU
license should also always be included.  In the past, source has
frequently been posted at the same time as binary; that's why I
suggested that.
-- 
-- Joe Buck	jbuck@epimass.epi.com, uunet!epimass.epi.com!jbuck