Re: GPL question
Samuel Hocevar <email@example.com>:
> However, if your printing server component is a library and is GPLed,
> then every work linked to it has to be GPLed (or have an even less
> restrictive license).
> > Also, is it relevant that at the moment the whole app. comes on a single CD?
> This is considered "mere aggregation" of software by the GPL, and
> thus the different parts of the work do not need to have the same
> license, even if there is one GPLed app there.
Sorry if this is off-topic, but I'm just checking that I understand
the GPL properly.
As I understand it, it is relevant that the whole application comes on
a single CD, because this is what prevents you from linking a non-GPL
program with a GPL library. If you distribute a CD with a GPL library,
and a separate CD with a non-GPL program as a "separate work", and
someone gets both CDs and links the program with the library, then the
GPL has been obeyed, because:
(i) the GPL library is being distributed according to the GPL;
(ii) the non-GPL program doesn't contain any code from the library and
is therefore not a "derivative work under copyright law";
(iii) the GPL only restricts "copying, distribution and modification";
it does not and could not restrict linking.
So my impression is that the GPL is basically equivalent to the LGPL
modulo (a significant amount of) inconvenience. If this is wrong, I
would like to know why. If it's off-topic, is there another list I