Re: Bug#287216: ITP: mysql++ -- C++ wrapper for MySQL's C API

[Adam Majer <sdf200411@zombino.com>]

I'll ask debian-legal. I have a pretty good idea that LGPL is ok for
source, but binary would be GPL due to MySQL client, but I'll ask anyway.

This is a question about possible license combinations. More
specifically, can a more freely licensed software than GPL use a GPL
library.

>>It states that the later versions of MySQL are GPL and that one could
>>not link to it with an LGPL license. 
>>    
>>
>
>This is not true.  If it were, no one using a GPL'd library could use 
>glibc, which is LGPL.  And since almost everything on a Linux box links 
>to glibc in one way or another, the statement cannot be true.
>
>Keep in mind, MySQL++ is just another library.  It is not a completed 
>program on its own.
>  
>

This is backwards. If we have,

A - GPL
B - LGPL
C - LGPL
D - BSD, non-free, LGPL or whatever

The above states that A cannot link with B, which is not what I meant. I
meant that,

A links with B (ex. a system library like glibc). ok
C links with A and B
D links with C and B

but C links with A. So can we have a C that is LGPL if it depends on a
GPL library?

What about D? It only uses LGPL API. Or is it the problem of D to look
after *all* of the dependencies of B and C?

Also, does the license of binary C changes automatically to GPL as soon
as it links with A? Can the license of source code C remain whatever
even if it links against A?

- Adam

PS. Please CC me, I'm not on the list.

-- 
The email address used to send this email is temporary.
It is bound to disappear at any time. Please thank the
morons that buy crap from spammers for this.