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