> On Tue, Oct 23, 2001 at 11:04:47AM +0200, Egon Willighagen wrote: > > Is it "legal" to have (I am thinking Java here): > > > > - A GPL-ed program that uses > > a LPGL-ed libraries that uses > > a "Apache Public License"-ed library > > > > The be precise, i am considering packaging a GPL-ed tool that uses the > > "Chemical Development Kit" [1], which in turn uses Xerces [2] > > and Log4J [3] both released with the APL license. > > This is a bad combination for us. > > > I've been browsing the debian-legal archives and "read" that this is not mere > > merging and licenses *should* be compatible. But reading the GPL Faq I would > > say the http://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl-faq.html#WritingFSWithNFLibs clause > > would apply: > > Note that while that exception allows the GPLed code to be distributed, > independently it doesn't allow the gpl'd code to accompany "the > executable" (of whatever major os component it is that the exception is > being granted against).
Sorry for my late reply; my HD crashed. What i understood from the replies it (among which this one, others may have been private), that it is OK to license the software GPL as long as the used APL libraries are part of the distribution on which it is installed, right? Thus this mean that making a Debian package out of it is OK by default, because it would only depend on parts in the distribution? Or need the libxerces deb package have some specific status, like base to be consisdered part of the operating system? Related, is licensing it with GPL ok, as long as the APL libs are not distributed along with the (L)GPL software, libs? Egon
