Steve Perkins wrote: >> You couldn't do that. However, libgcj carries with it an exception that >> allows you to link non-GPL code. Look at the license for more details. > > Can you perhaps elaborate? No offense, but I think the original > message makes clear that "looking at the licenses for more details" was > the first step I took before writing.
The licence is the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth. Nothing I say can make any difference. > I'm not really concerned about libgcj imposing terms on compiler > output (I knew about the linking exception, just didn't know if that was > dropped in the move from GPL v2 to v3). What I asked about was > voluntarily applying the GPL to my own new application. I think that depends on whether your work would be considered a derivative work of Eclipse code. I can't comment on that. > That > application links to a library under a different license, which does not > require linking applications to adopt its license. If I were doing > something that required that other license to be applied to the whole, > then I would clearly run into a conflict trying to apply it and the GPL > to the whole simultaneously. However, since I'm not required to apply > that other license to my own code, I don't see any conflict in using the > GPL for this new work. > > Is there something you have in mind that I'm missing there? It seems to me that you're seeking legal advice from people who aren't lawyers. We don't know, really: maybe FSF legal can help. Andrew.
