Carl Sorensen <c_soren...@byu.edu> writes: > On 2/25/19, 5:25 PM, "Karlin High" <karlinh...@gmail.com> wrote: > > On 2/25/2019 10:44 AM, Carl Sorensen wrote: > > A further look into PureDarwin's website shows that many of the > > Darwin utilities in fact link to closed-source Apple libraries. > > > > So probably we can't even ship a command-line-only version of > > LilyPond without having linking ability to OSX. > > Now, I expect the problem with linking to closed-source Apple libraries > is that the GNU General Public License doesn't allow for it? > > On a non-GPL operating system, interaction with closed-source, non-free > software can't really be avoided; where's the boundary for GPL > acceptability? > > > Reading from the GPL FAQ, it appears that as long as the libraries are > System Libraries (and I think the OSX SDK libraries are System > Libraries), and the libraries are linked as part of an executable, > it's OK:
If we link with Apple libraries, we also need to heed the licensing conditions of the Apple libraries. Do they stand for this? -- David Kastrup _______________________________________________ lilypond-devel mailing list lilypond-devel@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel
