Sender: nate AT cartsys DOT com
Message-ID: <36F55AFA.D065D756@cartsys.com>
Date: Sun, 21 Mar 1999 12:47:54 -0800
From: Nate Eldredge <nate AT cartsys DOT com>
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.08 [en] (X11; I; Linux 2.2.3 i586)
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: djgpp AT delorie DOT com
Subject: Re: (Fwd) Compression
References: <Pine DOT SUN DOT 3 DOT 91 DOT 990316155118 DOT 19469I-100000 AT is> <36f1c898 DOT 5217335 AT mail DOT stardate DOT bc DOT ca> <199903190357 DOT WAA32755 AT envy DOT delorie DOT com> <36f46114 DOT 1939698 AT mail DOT stardate DOT bc DOT ca>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Reply-To: djgpp AT delorie DOT com

Richard Sanders wrote:
> 
> On Thu, 18 Mar 1999 22:57:57 -0500, in comp.os.msdos.djgpp you wrote:
> 
> >
> >>     For the usage and distribution license please read the
> >>     file LICENSE.TXT.
> >
> >Can it be distributed under the terms of the GNU GPL?  If not, it
> >can't go in djtar anyway.
> 
> I emailed Eugene Roshal, the author if RAR below is the reply.
> 
> I don't see an agreement to allow distribution under the GPL but I do
> see a liberal usage of the code.  What do you think DJ.

I don't think GPL permits such restrictions on what can be done with
GPL'd code, though it's hard to tell from the text.  gnu.misc.discuss
might be a good place to ask (though take your asbestos trousers).  In
any case, it would be contrary to the spirit of the GPL, IMHO.

If we want better compression, it *is* out there.  .tar.gz is a logical
first step to take, and for even better compression, there's bzip2 (slow
and memory-hogging though it is).  Both are GPL.
-- 

Nate Eldredge
nate AT cartsys DOT com