I just don’t see the distinction as clearly when it’s a single binary that canno... | Hacker News

Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit

		dijit 3 months ago \| parent \| context \| favorite \| on: GrapheneOS accessed Android security patches but n... I just don’t see the distinction as clearly when it’s a single binary that cannot be decoupled or introspected. Why is it if I build a static binary with GPL code and distribute it I must open source my changes; but if you do the same as a whole OS it’s not necessary. Feels like it should all be fine or none of it is fine somehow.

nottorp 3 months ago [–]

If you go that way, every bash script you've ever written should also be under the GPL.

And R code, at a quick glance.

dijit 3 months ago | [–]

only if someone was to copy the entire script and then put it into their distributed binary; which is what I am saying that the OEMs are doing with Linux.

Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact