Re: Re: [lsb-futures] Qt libs ... included in the kernel 2.6 ... Why still blocked?
"Dr. Giovanni A. Orlando" <[email protected]>
| Newsgroups | gmane.linux.lsb.discuss |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <[email protected]> |
Nils O. Selåsdal wrote: >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. > Yes. Is right! ... and is cool ;-) Gotcha! ... Seems that the LinuxKernel inherits the GUI problem. This is just I WANT TO AVOID. When, we will choose ONE? ... and discard the other? I continue to like and prefer KDE and Qt. Sorry. It is more nice to work for. >>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.. > If you use Qt, and the applications will be NOT-commercial, you don't need to pay anyone. Thanks, Giovanni >(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. >>> >>> >>> > > >