> My limited understanding is that the GPLed parts of the product must be
made available.  But I'm not aware that using GPLed parts means that
/everything/ /else/ must also be made available.

From what I read, you are correct -it doesn't. At least that's what the FSF appears to say themselves: https://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl-faq.en.html#GPLAndNonfreeOnSameMachine
There's been some attempts over the years (eg Microsoft's "get the facts" campaign) to muddy the waters on that issue and paint the GNU license as acting "cancerous"; but I'm not aware of any legal precedents backing that up.

Another part of the same page that you might find interesting (regarding distributing sources):
https://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl-faq.en.html#DistributeWithSourceOnInternet

Of course if someone is acting as an owner or employee of a company they'll want to consult their legal staff in addition to reading what the GNU have to say as well.

/disclaimer; I do not work in IT, but have used Unix and Linux for 25 years now -make of that what you will

On Fri, Dec 24, 2021 at 1:52 PM Grant Taylor via TUHS <tuhs@minnie.tuhs.org> wrote:
On 12/21/21 11:23 PM, jason-tuhs@shalott.net wrote:
> As an end user, you would not care.

That tends to explain why I've not personally cared.

> As a vendor or distributor, you would care.  Anyone doing an OS or other
> software distribution (think the BSDs, of course; but also think Apple
> or Microsoft) needs to care.  Anyone selling a hardware device with
> embedded software (think switches/routers; think IOT devices; think
> consumer devices like DVRs; etc) needs to care.  GPL (or similar
> "virally" licensed) software carries legal implications for anyone
> selling or distributing products that contain such software; and this
> can be a motivation to use software with less-restrictive license terms.

Okay.

My limited understanding is that the GPLed parts of the product must be
made available.  But I'm not aware that using GPLed parts means that
/everything/ /else/ must also be made available.

Also, I believe /made/ /available/ means that it must be accessible or
provided when asked.  Thus it does not mean that the GPLed code needs to
be shipped with the product.

> I'm aware of a few random features that are in ksh93 but not other
> shells (random, trivial, example that I saw just today*: "printf
> %(FORMAT)T"). That said, my first impulse would have been to say no,
> there aren't any meaningful (technical) advantages to ksh over bash --
> except that it seems there's still some amount of active development
> going on in ksh:

The biggest motivation I had in a previous job was to make sure that my
account's shell was set to a shell that lived on the root file system.

I could easily have that shell test to see if my preferred shell was
available and start or exec it.  That way I could still log in if the
file system with my preferred shell was not mounted.  As if I needed to
address the underlying issue that was preventing the desired shell from
being accessible.  E.g. /usr/bin/bash wasn't available b/c /usr wasn't
automatically mounted at boot.

> So I guess, for some people at least, there are indeed reasons to prefer
> it, including (according to users in those github issues) performance.

At my last job I helped administer some systems that didn't have any
shells other than was was in the base OS installation.  (We won't talk
about why.)

> On the licensing front, the GPL is an issue for bash; but zsh is
> available as a more modern, fully-featured shell that avoids any GPL
> issues.  This is why Apple switched the default shell in OSX from bash
> to zsh: they wanted to avoid the GPLv3.  Previously, they had been
> shipping the last GPLv2 version of bash, which was from 2006.  According
> to this blog, they've been avoiding any GPLv3 code and actively working
> to remove even GPLv2 code in OSX for quite a while:

That makes sense.

> * bash seems to recognize %(FORMAT)T, but only takes epoch seconds as an
> argument.  ksh93 takes anything vaguely date-like.  zsh and pdksh don't
> recognize it at all.

Interesting.

Thank you for the informative reply Jason.



--
Grant. . . .
unix || die