Why is Fedora not a Free GNU/Linux distributions?

Alexandre Oliva aoliva at redhat.com
Sun Jul 20 08:44:23 UTC 2008

On Jul 19, 2008, Antonio Olivares <olivares14031 at yahoo.com> wrote:

> Your meaning of object code is binary code?

The GPL defines it anything that's not source code, i.e., that's not
the preferred form for making modifications ot the software.

> and the modifications is the source code?

Modifications are made to the source code, yes.

> If I understand your point, they released versions of Linux only as
> binary, but without providing the sources(source code) for their
> modifications.

Without providing corresponding source code, or offering to provide
it, yes.  Whether they modify it or not is irrelevant.

> You can do whatever you want with the code, just not release it to
> anyone and if you do, you have to provide the source code?

> Is that correct?

This pretty much sums up GPLv2.  GPLv3 is has further requirements in
some details, and is more lax in others.

Alexandre Oliva         http://www.lsd.ic.unicamp.br/~oliva/
Free Software Evangelist  oliva@{lsd.ic.unicamp.br, gnu.org}
FSFLA Board Member       ¡Sé Libre! => http://www.fsfla.org/
Red Hat Compiler Engineer   aoliva@{redhat.com, gcc.gnu.org}

More information about the fedora-list mailing list