Quoth Anselm R Garbe: > > The concern I have is not about compiling, but about _statically_ > > linking and distributing binaries that contain mixed license .o's. > > I checked with the FSF on this topic and they confirmed that it is > fine to distribute statically linked _binaries_ under the terms of GPL > in case that the source consists of mixed GPL and GPL-compatible > licenses[0] (like MIT/X). So, I will just publish such binaries under > the terms of GPL.
I'm glad that is the case. I have no problems complying with the GPL, and I can't imagine many others do either. > There are cases though, where a GPL-incompatible license like the > OpenSSL license (also used by libressl) might come into play. In such Happily the OpenSSL license issue should go away soon, as they're working on relicensing to Apache 2.0: https://www.openssl.org/blog/blog/2015/08/01/cla/ Nick
