Re: X and LSB

[Dale Scheetz <dwarf@polaris.net>]

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.

Luck,

Dwarf
--
_-_-_-_-_-   Author of "The Debian Linux User's Guide"  _-_-_-_-_-_-

aka   Dale Scheetz                   Phone:   1 (850) 656-9769
      Flexible Software              11000 McCrackin Road
      e-mail:  dwarf@polaris.net     Tallahassee, FL  32308

_-_-_-_-_-_- See www.linuxpress.com for more details  _-_-_-_-_-_-_-