Comment GNU libc (Score 1) 887
Subject: glibc 2.2.4
From: Ulrich Drepper
Date: 15 Aug 2001 22:09:23 -0700
Release 2.2.4 of the GNU C library is now available at
ftp://sources.redhat.com/pub/glibc/releases
[end quote]
I can't make much out of Drepper's accusations. What exactly is supposed to have happened? And what is so different about the LGPL 2.1 that Drepper does not like?
Both versions have the "any later version" clause. Is it only that ver. 2.1 mentions the term Gnu/Linux? But it's only used there as an example, nothing legaly requires you to follow that example. Does Drepper now wish that the GNU libc library could be re-named to the Linux libc library, or what? Why did he originally license it under a GNU license in the first place? Or did he? Who originally named it the Gnu libc? What is the history of glibc?
Has anyone seen or heard or read anything that backs up these claims?
