Alfred M. Szmidt wrote:
I do not understand "Q.E.D.". For the other part, if you understand "run" as "read", which I think is quite appropiate, it works.
QED means `quod erat demonstrandum', which is Latin for `which was demonstrated'.
Actually "which was to be demonstrated", BTW.
Sorry, but if the documentation of a free program has FDL, then it can contain invariant sections, so that I am limited :)
Wrong. Only if it _has_ invariants.
No. I'm limited because someone can insert invariant sections later, a newly modified derivation. I can't reuse that derived version without taking the invariant section with it. :-)
You can't take a GPLed licensed work without licensing the derived work under the same terms as the GPL. So you cannot reuse the resulting work under a GPL-incompatible license.
But you can reuse parts of the work under a GPL-compatible license. And it's up to you which parts you take.
Nothing different for the GFDL.
Quite different for the GFDL. You can reuse parts of the work under a GFDL-compatible license, and you can choose which parts of the non-invariant sections you take, but you always have to take all of the invariant sections.
Frank