Przemyslaw Czerpak wrote:
On Sat, 14 Mar 2009, Phil Barnett wrote:
Hi,
LGPL only protects from GPL for dynamically linked code. If you staticly
link LGPL, it becomes GPL and has the problem mentioned before.
We spent months working out the license. I have the archives if we need to
study.
Thank you for information.
AFAIK It's not true. You can link statically.
The only one think you have to made is adding user an option to
upgrade the LGPL part of code.
It means that you should deliver also dynamic binaries on user
request or give the user source code or recompile the binaries
on user requests with new LGPL code. It doesn't matter how you
resolve it. Important is the fact that user has rights to update
the LGPL part of code and you should not block such possibilities.
For me it's quite good option for compiler library. Please note
that I'm talking about compiler library not macro compiler.
Now it's possible to link compiler with final application, f.e.
to add support for some scripts.
The exception was never about the compiler itself. It is all about users
wishing to create proprietary code executables with GPL code built into
it. The exception is for the users of the compiler, not the compiler itself.
Even the simplest compile and link of Harbour brings in GPL code.
Without the exception, there is no way to distribute a proprietary
executable legally.
_______________________________________________
Harbour mailing list
Harbour@harbour-project.org
http://lists.harbour-project.org/mailman/listinfo/harbour
