Re: Re: [lsb-futures] Qt libs ... included in the kernel 2.6 ... Why still blocked?

"Nils O." Selåsdal <[email protected]>
Newsgroups gmane.linux.lsb.discuss
Organization UtelSystems
Message-ID <1068195767.1290.8.camel@nos-rh>
On Thu, 2003-11-06 at 22:34, Dr. Giovanni A. Orlando wrote:
> Matt Taggart wrote:
> 
> >"Dr. Giovanni A. Orlando" writes...
> >
> >  
> >
> >>Hi Friends,
> >>
> >>    In the past, I was a knight defending the Qt insertion in the LSB 
> >>Specific.
> >>
> >>    Actually state is "Blocked", in the futures.
> >>   
> >>        http://www.linuxbase.org/futures/candidates/index.html
> >>
> >>    Now, I download some days ago, the kernel 2.6-test9 and running 
> >>"make xconfig" I found
> >>a wonderfull evolution, not more based on Tcl/Tk but on Qt ... Yes, on Qt.
> >>
> >>    Now, that Qt is included in the Linux Kernel ... Are there some 
> >>possibilities that become
> >>"Active" and therefore UN-Blocked!
> >>    
> >>
> >
> >It's not blocked because people don't use it, it's blocked for license 
> >reasons. 
> >
> I know that very well ... But the Linux Kernel are using it!!!, in other 
> words if someone that wants to
> compile the kernel in graphical mode will compile the file:
> 
> /usr/src/linux-2.6.0-test9/scripts/kconfig/qt.cc

Just fyi. There is gconfig as well (make gconfig) it unsurprisingly uses
GTK.


> that requeries the Qt library. What is the situation in this case about 
> the licenses?
> 
> Generally it is included ... in any case to avoid licenses restrictions, 
> Qt must be used like ... the Linux kernel,
> I think.
> 
> 
> ... So, actually both the Linux Kernel and Qt are at the same level: GPL.
> 
> Qt is GPL ...
> http://www.trolltech.com/newsroom/announcements/00000043.html
Which is why I won't use it. I don't want to pay Trolltech. Nor
do I want to GPL my(our) applications. It would be imho nicer
to incorporate GTK+2.something in LSB. So one can atleast write
LSB compliant GUI applications without paying royalties to any party..
(Writing GUI using the core X libraries is no fun, nor are statically
linked
appliations..)

> I suppose that LSB maintainers must be clear with this new inclusion.
> 
> >Please take a look at the tracking page, the criteria it refers 
> >to, and if you still have questions/concerns ask them on the lsb-futures 
> >list.
> >

-- 
Vennlig hilsen/Best Regards
Nils Olav Selåsdal
System Engineer
UtelSystems a/s

w w w . u t e l s y s t e m s . c o m
lmpx.com only provides a reader for public news (NNTP) servers. It is not affiliated with the servers or forums shown here and is not responsible for the content of articles, which is written by their respective authors.