[arch-general] An old, tiresome discussion: cdrtools vs cdrkit

[Denis A. Altoé Falqueto]

On Mon, Jan 25, 2010 at 4:40 PM, Ray Kohler <ataraxia937 at gmail.com> wrote:
> On Mon, Jan 25, 2010 at 11:49 AM, Kitty <secacat at gmail.com> wrote:
>> FWIW, I'm in favor of #3, and practically, the other bigger distros
>> that have switched back to cdrtools are fatter targets for any legal
>> action. Furthermore, who exactly would be doing the suing? If it's the
>> GNU, then their goal would be to fix the licence problems, not collect
>> money. If that happened, put it all in AUR and wash our hands.

There's one thing that I don't understand:

Cdrtools doesn't provide any library to be linked against. It is just
a set of executables that can be called by scripts or graphical
frontends, like k3b. So why is illegal to distribute a CDDL package
that will be used by a GPL package in executable form? I mean, there's
no linking happening, and, as I understand it, that's legal according
to GPL.

Am I missing something?

-- 

A: Because it obfuscates the reading.
Q: Why is top posting so bad?

-------------------------------------------
Denis A. Altoe Falqueto
-------------------------------------------