Francesco Poli <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Sat, 14 Jul 2007 21:56:27 -0700 (PDT) Walter Landry wrote: > > > Francesco Poli <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > On Mon, 2 Jul 2007 12:31:13 -0400 Anthony Towns wrote: > > > > > > [...] > > > > Note that _if_ we do stick to the view we've taken up until now, > > > > when we have a LGPLv3 only glibc in the archive, we'll no longer > > > > be able to distribute GPLv2-only compiled executables. > > > > > > Unless the GPLv2-only work copyright holder(s) add(s) a special > > > exception, similar to the one needed to link with the OpenSSL > > > library, right? > > > > > > This scenario is worrying me... :-( > > > > Is this going to be a problem for the kernel? It is definitely not > > going to go to GPLv3. > > Is the Linux kernel linked with any LGPL'd work? > AFAIUI, it is not, so no problem for the kernel.
Doesn't the kernel get its implementations for pow(), sqrt(), printf(), and the rest of the C standard library from glibc, which is LGPL'd? Cheers, Walter Landry [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
