On Tue, 13 Nov 2001, Andrew C. Greenberg wrote:

[snip]
> But the real problem is deeper.  GPL just doesn't work with monolithic 
> image systems, for the reasons previously stated -- it has the effect of 
> writing out of the license the (known to be essential) exception for 
> independently written programs.  At least not as RMS interprets the GPL 
> (I do believe there are strong legal arguments to the contrary).  In 
> part for this reason, no GPL'd Smalltalk system has been successful to 
> date, nor can it ever succeed, again, for reasons previously stated.
[snip]

There is GNU Smalltalk. I don't know if it's "successful", but it's VM is
GPLed, the core class libs are LGPLed and the browser and compiler are
GPLed, all, I would imagine, with the blessing of the FSF.

	ftp://alpha.gnu.org/gnu/smalltalk/gst-manual/gst_4.html#SEC4

	"""GNU Smalltalk is distributed as a library that you can link
your programs to. It's very simple: just include `gstpub.h', link to
`libgst.a', and you're done. For more information on what to do in your
program so that it communicates well with Smalltalk, relate to 4.
Interoperability between C and GNU Smalltalk.

In this case, your program must be free, licensed under a license that is
compatible with the GNU General Public License, under which the GNU
Smalltalk virtual machine is licensed. The Smalltalk programs that we
bundle with GNU Smalltalk (currently the browser and the compiler) are
also subject to the General Public License, and must be made free. 

On the other hand, the core GNU Smalltalk class libraries (standard
classes, Blox, TCP abstraction, XML parsing) are released under the GNU
Lesser General Public License. It is not necessary (although we would
appreciate it) that programs that only use these libraries are made
free."""

I have no idea how this flies. My casual perusal of the uppercased bits of
Andrews messages suggested to me that this wasn't feasible.

Cheers,
Bijan Parsia.