Re: X and LSB
On Fri, 17 Mar 2000, Evan Leibovitch wrote:
> On Fri, 17 Mar 2000, Jim Knoble wrote:
> > : That is why, if i were a commercial software house, i would consider
> > : the possibility to produce a statically linked version of my product.
> > Ah, but linking non-GPLed code statically with LGPLed libraries
> > violates the license; the LGPL specifically states this. Something to
> > keep in mind.
> Not really, at least in this context. Licensing issues are totally outside
> the scope of the LSB.
The context of Linux _is_ the Free Software Community. While the LSB has
no task to standardize licenses, the existance of current license practice
_does_ impact the usability and acceptability of the features we _do_
intend to specify.
Anything that effects the general acceptance of the LSB specification is
clearly _inside_ the scpoe of the discussion.
_-_-_-_-_- Author of "The Debian Linux User's Guide" _-_-_-_-_-_-
aka Dale Scheetz Phone: 1 (850) 656-9769
Flexible Software 11000 McCrackin Road
e-mail: firstname.lastname@example.org Tallahassee, FL 32308
_-_-_-_-_-_- See www.linuxpress.com for more details _-_-_-_-_-_-_-