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

Re: dynamic versus statically linked libraries



On Fri, Jun 02, 2000 at 07:22:17AM -0500, gk4@us.ibm.com wrote:
> 3) If I have an *PL or private applicaiton that statically links an LGPL
> library, then it becomes LGPLed.  See FSF's
> http://www.gnu.org/copyleft/lesser.html section 4.

Not as I understand it. Section 4 refers to distributing the library
itself, not a derivative work based on it. A statically linked executable
is such a derivative work, and falls under section 5. When they say
"A program that contains no derivative of any portion of the Library,
but is designed to work with the Library by being compiled or linked
with it..." they're referring to the source code (ie, the thing that
can be compiled), not the executable.

Cheers,
aj, NAL

-- 
Anthony Towns <aj@humbug.org.au> <http://azure.humbug.org.au/~aj/>
I don't speak for anyone save myself. GPG encrypted mail preferred.

  ``We reject: kings, presidents, and voting.
                 We believe in: rough consensus and working code.''
                                      -- Dave Clark

Attachment: pgp7DAbtzXoIH.pgp
Description: PGP signature


Reply to: