[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: X and LSB

On Fri, 17 Mar 2000, Shaya Potter wrote:

> I don't believe that's the case, as I thought the LGPL was explicitly
> created for static linking, b/c in those cases you are including GPL'd
> code in your product.
> It's a much harder question in regards to dynamic linking as you aren't
> including any GPL'd code per say in your application.  RMS argues that you
> can't dynamicly link GPL'd code into your app, if it's not GPL'd but I
[ ... snip ... ]

Uh, before your speculation runs even more rampant, I suggest you read the
LGPL and the GPL _licenses_.

This isn't a matter of opinion.  It's a software license.  It's remarkably

In the case of the LGPL, section 5 of the "Terms and conditions" states
that static linking of non-GPL or non-LGPL code with the executable is

In the case of the GPL, both dynamic and static linking with non-Free code
are prohibited.

Surprisingly enough, these licenses (and more) can be found on the Free
Software Foundation's website at:


| Jeffrey Watts                     |
| watts@jayhawks.net         o-------------------------------------------o
| Systems Programmer         | "Capital punishment turns the state into  |
| Network Systems Management |  a murderer.  But imprisonment turns the  |
| Sprint Communications      |  state into a gay dungeon-master."        |
o----------------------------|  -- Emo Philips                           |

Reply to: