Slashdot Mirror


Emacs Has Been Violating the GPL Since 2009

Digana writes "Emacs, one of GNU's flagship products and the most famous software creation of Richard Stallman, has been discovered to be violating the GPL since 2009-09-28 by distributing binaries that were missing source. The CEDET package, a set of contributed files for giving certain IDE functionality related to static code analysis, has distributed files generated from bison grammars without distributing the grammar itself. This happened for Emacs versions 23.2 and 23.3, released during late 2009, and has just been discovered."

3 of 295 comments (clear)

  1. Did anyone ASK for that source? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Informative

    If not, then it's not breaking GPL.

    1. Re:Did anyone ASK for that source? by BitZtream · · Score: 4, Informative

      Not really strange, no one cares except pedants who were too busy slurping Stallman's wiener and bitching about everyone else to notice their own hypocrisy.

      This is simply no big deal, the source to the files IS available. There really ISN'T a GPL violation. Its just not in a specific set of packages, which there is no requirement for it to be so.

      The GPL requires the source to be available, it is, its just not included by default, which is perfectly acceptable.

      Second, in order for this to be a violation, the authors of said files have to call it a violation. You (nor I) get the right to determine its a violation (again, this goes contrary to what most GPL zealots think). The copyright holder does, to which, the copyright holder may have granted an exception or special license to Emacs for this purpose.

      The only thing going on here is a few people getting their panties in a bunch over nothing. Another fine example of why any intelligent company keeps as far away from GPL as possible, the followers of the Cult of GPL will happily stab themselves in the eye because a doctor gives them pink eye medicine.

      If the original author of these files hasn't bitched, there is no violation. If he or she has/is then we have something to talk about, but I find it highly unlikely that said person will be raising much hooha about it.

      Mistakes happen, everyone needs to not go retarded nuts over shit like this in relation to the GPL, you just make yourselfs look like a bunch of dick heads.

      (Note: This post isn't entirely directed at the person I'm responding too, just happens to be the place I decided to post my thoughts)

      --
      Persistent Volume manager for Kubernetes - https://github.com/dwimsey/openshift-pvmanager
  2. text of RMS's mail by ciaran_o_riordan · · Score: 4, Informative
    For anyone who didn't click the link, here's RMS's reaction:

    We have made a very bad mistake. Anyone redistributing those versions is violating the GPL, through no fault of his own.

    We need to fix those releases retroactively (or else delete them), and we need to do it right away.

    I see two quick ways to fix them: to delete the compiled files, or to add the sources they are made from.

    From the mail linked to in the story: http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/emacs-devel/2011-07/msg01155.html