Re: cygwin.dll license (was Re: FreeQt ?)
On Sun, 1 Jun 1997, Jim Pick wrote:
>
> > Yes, very limiting. The code actually cannot be linked statically!
>
> Can't be linked dynamically either... read the GPL.
>
I'm not sure from a copyright standpoint how that works. A copyright
means that you are protected from me using your copyrighted item. Well,
if I don't give libc or any other gpl'd library away, be it as a
statically linked app, or by giving away the shared library how am I
violating the gpl. If joe end-user already has the library, how am I
violating the copyright. Even if commercial products build against a
gpl'd library, if they are only linked dynamically against the library,
i.e. they don't contain any code from the library, and that library can be
replaced by another one (look at lesstif vs. Motif).
In my view
LPGL=I can statically link my applications to the library and sell it w/o
source code.
GPL=I can statically link my application to the library, but my
application now has to be GPL'd because it contains GPL'd code. However,
if it is only dynamically linked, since it doesn't contain any GPL'd
code, I can sell it as a commercial app w/o giving out source code.
Shaya
--
TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word "unsubscribe" to
debian-devel-request@lists.debian.org .
Trouble? e-mail to templin@bucknell.edu .
Reply to: