First thanks for the relicensing! Bruno Haible <br...@clisp.org> writes:
> Simon Josefsson wrote on 2011-01-19: >> OTOH, by only relicensing some modules, I don't think I can use an >> installed libunistring shared library, which would contain LGPLv3+ code >> too. > > Yes, I agree, this would be too hairy from a legal point of view. You can > explain to a lawyer which .so file requires which .so file (via "ldd" or > "readelf"), but it's too hard to explain that a .so file consists of > two parts, one part under LGPLv2+ and one part under LGPLv3+ and that > they should be considered as independent "works" although no tool exists > that can separate the two parts. Right. And I don't think that is essential -- I see the LGPLv2+ part as mostly for glibc, which likely will not want to link to libunistring but to a self-contained "libcidn2.so" like it is done today for libidn. /Simon
