Re: LGPL

["Sergio A. Kessler" <ser perio unlp edu ar>]

James Henstridge <james@daa.com.au> el día Mon, 12 Apr 1999 08:41:38 +0800 
(WST), escribió:

>There is no problem using the LGPL.  If someone wants to statically link
>your LGPL code into a commercial executable, they are also required to
>distribute the unlinked object code so that users can (at their
>discretion) link the commercial program with a newer version of the LGPL
>code.

the problem is that our compiler can't do object code so the users
can link again, and more importantly we don't want to force the
author to do this.
I know that this is difficult to understand for a non-Delphi 
programmer, but we have years of doing things this way without 
problems.

>The standard binutils have some arguments that allow you to combine a
>number of object files into a single larger one, which would make
>distribution easier (ie.  The closed source program is distributed with a
>single extra .o file).

our library is not a common library, another problem.

>If this gives the ammount of leniency to closed program writers you wanted
>to, then you should probably go with the LGPL.

we /want/ to go with the LGPL, but we are knocked with this.

>
>On Sat, 10 Apr 1999, Sergio wrote:
>
>> 
>> Hi, I have libraries under the LGPL that hopefully will go
>> to Megido (a GPL/LGPL Delphi for GTK/Gnome):
>> 
>> - my libraries are small (they are small components).
>> - there are no practical way other than _statically_ link
>>   my libraries
>> - I want that my libraries could be used *whatever* the
>>   license of the final executable (free, commercial, closed, etc)
>> 
>> >From LGPL:
>> 
>> <<However, linking a "work that uses the Library" with the Library
>> creates an executable that is a derivative of the Library (because it
>> contains portions of the Library), rather than a "work that uses the
>> library".  The executable is therefore covered by this License.
>> Section 6 states terms for distribution of such executables.>>
>> 
>> So, I think I have a problem here, no ?
>> I don't want to force the executables containing my libraries
>> to use a certain license.
>> How I can manage this ?
>> I must use another license ?
>> 
>> TIA,
>> Sergio
>> 
>> 
>> -- 
>> To unsubscribe: mail gnome-devel-list-request@gnome.org with 
"unsubscribe"
>> as the Subject.
>>