Re: [Linux-aus] Meaning of object code/binary format/executable format in GPL/BSD style licenses

[Benno <benno@benno.id.au>]

On Wed Sep 20, 2006 at 15:09:30 +1000, Conrad Parker wrote:
>Hi Benno,
>
>whether or not this answers your question, my understanding of the GNU GPL 
>is that the "source" which must be made available is in the format most
>commonly edited by humans.
>
>ie. if you write a parser using lex+yacc, then you must distribute the
>grammar specification, not just the generated C code. If you distribute
>an MP3 of a MOD music file, you should distribute the MOD itself.
>
>I don't think the licensing of your control-flow graph algorithm would be
>influenced by the license on the input source that is being rendered, if
>that's what you're asking. IANAL.
>

Just to be clear I was talking about the licensing of the output file,
not the CFG algorithm itself.

Benno

(P.S: This isn't something *I* want to do ;)