Re: Distribution of sources and binaries and the GPL, Again :( (was [Mingw-users] MinGW GCC)

[Tor Lillqvist <tml iki fi>]

Earnie Boyd writes:

> The packages libiconv and libintl should be included in the GLib
> distributed source package in such a fashion that I should just be able
> to configure && make and all of the dependent pieces are built in proper
> order.

Really? Do you realize that there is no separate GLib source package
for Windows. Are you really claiming that LGPL requires source for all
dependent libraries that might not be present on some operating system
to be included in the source packages? Whew.

<irony> And why stop there? What about tools? Should one include the
source to gcc and binutils, too, as few Unix vendors nowadays bundle a
compiler?  And of course, binary versions of gcc to make the bootstrap
possible. Not to mention a shell executable to run the configure
script, a make executable, etc.</irony>

--tml