On Fri, Apr 8, 2011 at 1:00 AM, Jerry Franz <jfranz at freerun.com> wrote: > On 04/07/2011 03:52 PM, Scott Silva wrote: >> >> The GPL says they must release source. It doesn't say they have to also >> release any magic spells they use to compile it. >> > > Actually, it *does*. If the code was released with missing 'magic fairy > dust' required to actually compile the GPL derived binaries they > release, they would be in violation of GPL2 section 3. > > You should read http://gpl-violations.org/faq/sourcecode-faq.html to > understand the implications of the GPL on source code release. You want > to read the sections on 'What are "scripts used to control > compilation"?' and 'What are "scripts used to control installation"?' Interesting. I wonder how would RedHat respond to this.