In article <RATINOX.93Jul6144453@denali.ccs.neu.edu> ratinox@denali.ccs.neu.edu (Richard Pieri) writes:
quoted text
>The analogy being presented between Linux and RIPEM is not a valid analogy.
>
>
>Linux has no such license, as far as I am aware. There is no such conflict
>between the GPL and Linux.
Hmm. I think the questions are.

Facts.
1. Linux is a GNU product. Significant parts of it are covered by the GPL
   (e.g. the kernel)
2. It is technically possible to build RIPEM/RSAREF on Linux.
3. The resulting binary would be a "product" designed to work with Linux.
   It would be useless to anyone not running Linux.
4. Someone is selling Motif for Linux.

Questions:
1. Can one build RIPEM/RSAREF for Linux?
2. Can one use RIPEM/RSAREF on a Linux system?
3. Can one distribute a Linux ripem binary?
4. Can one distribute a makefile entry for RIPEM under Linux?
5. Is selling Motif for Linux a violation of the GPL?
6. Can one, "in general" distribute and use, software the FSF considers
   not "free" for a Linux system.

If the FSF is going to act as the Linux software police, then
that will effect the popularity and evolution of Linux.

Mark
-- 
Mark Henderson
markh@wimsey.bc.ca (personal account)
RIPEM key available by key server/finger/E-mail
  MD5OfPublicKey: F1F5F0C3984CBEAF3889ADAFA2437433