On Thu, Sep 02, 2010 at 05:03:40AM -0300, Rogério Brito wrote: > Hi there. > > On Sep 01 2010, Stephen Sinclair wrote: > > I don't have the ability to reverse engineer it and write my own > > drivers, but I'd still like users of this device to be able to make > > use of my software. > > Right. You can dlopen the library, depending on the case. Your program > will still be Free, in the same sense that the Linux Kernel is Free. > You may want to check the license that you will eventually use: I think > that the GPL wouldn't cut it, but the LGPL might. > > > Would such a library have difficulty getting accepted by Debian? > > The library, yes. Your program? No, depending on how "dependent" the > program would be on that library. If the use of said devices is just a > minor part of the program's role, then it may be accepted into main, > without any problems. > I find it a little confusing, he was first saying he wants to write a _library_, than can uses a proprietary library. What I understand is that his library (the one he want to write) could be accepted to main if it is useful without the proprietary library (that can be considered as a hardware driver). Then any program using it could also go to main (provided that no other dependency would require it to be contrib or non-free). > > OTOH, if it needs the library, then the most that you would be able to > do with your program would be to go into contrib. Of course if the proprietary library is necessary then his library goes to contrib as well as any program depending on it. Also I think I've read somewhere that no library really enter debian unless a program requires it. (which kind of makes sense). Tell me if I'm wrong, I'm currently learning debian practices. -- Julien Viard de Galbert <julien@vdg.blogsite.org> http://silicone.homelinux.org/ <julien@silicone.homelinux.org> GPG Key ID: D00E52B6 Published on: hkp://keys.gnupg.net Key Fingerprint: E312 A31D BEC3 74CC C49E 6D69 8B30 6538 D00E 52B6
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature