Subject: embedded systems [was Re: EROS license]
From: "Stephen J. Turnbull" <turnbull@sk.tsukuba.ac.jp>
Date: Mon, 28 Jun 1999 23:16:36 +0900 (JST)

>>>>> "DJ" == DJ Delorie <dj@delorie.com> writes:

    DJ> DJGPP has a version of this "dual license" in its terms.  It
    DJ> allows itself to be used in a proprietary program *if* it
    DJ> remains unmodified and the customer is told where to get DJGPP
    DJ> for themselves.

This is, as it has always been, the runtime system (DOS extender, DPMI
host, etc) in DJGPP, right?  That was always part of the public
license for those portions of DJGPP; by "dual licensing" you mean that
the runtime can be distributed as a binary compiled from unmodified
source with source pointer, or under GPL?

That seems to me to not really address the issues here, since you
presumably could add that as an exceptional clause in a single
"DJPL".  (Not to deprecate the idea itself, which has always seemed
excellent to me.)

"Real" dual-licensing would involve you granting different rights to
some users that are not available in a public license.

-- 
University of Tsukuba                Tennodai 1-1-1 Tsukuba 305-8573 JAPAN
Institute of Policy and Planning Sciences       Tel/fax: +81 (298) 53-5091
__________________________________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________________________
What are those two straight lines for?  "Free software rules."