Re: Haskell Platform Proposal: HLint

7 Dec 2010


      On 05/12/10 22:28, Conrad Parker wrote:
...
On 4 December 2010 00:04, Simon Marlow  wrote:
...
On 12/11/2010 19:38, Duncan Coutts wrote:
...
On 12 November 2010 18:58, Malcolm Wallace    wrote:
...
...
since we have after all been shipping GPL tools and LGPL C libs along
with
ghc for
some years.
Indeed.   For many years, every program compiled by ghc (using libgmp to
implement the unbounded Integer type) automatically fell under the terms
of
the LGPL.  Is that still the case?
Yes.
Well, it's not clear that the license on GMP applies to executables that
just dynamically link against it.  There is considerable disagreement on
that point, AIUI.  But executables that dynamically link against GMP are in
compliance with the LGPL anyway, so it doesn't really matter.
We also use system calls, and yet the Linux kernel is GPL'd...
~/src/linux/linux-2.6$ head COPYING
NOTE! This copyright does *not* cover user programs that use kernel
  services by normal system calls - this is merely considered normal use
  of the kernel, and does *not* fall under the heading of "derived work".
  Also note that the GPL below is copyrighted by the Free Software
  Foundation, but the instance of code that it refers to (the Linux
  kernel) is copyrighted by me and others who actually wrote it.
Also note that the only valid version of the GPL as far as the kernel
  is concerned is _this_ particular version of the license (ie v2, not
...
Well yes, I *know* that the GPL isn't supposed to leak from the kernel 
into userland programs, but I was just pointing out the similarity 
between this and dynamically linked libraries.

Cheers,
	Simon