On Monday 15 June 2009, Nicolas Pitre wrote: > > > The issue is simply whether someone *DISTRIBUTING* binaries is > > allowed to rely on that library. And permission for that has > > never been granted, through the license, by any contributor. > > This position is of course a bit strong. I doubt many people here care > that much about using OpenOCD to promote the agenda behind the GPL.
I don't think that's quite accurate. :) > Yet, "relying" on a library is not what the GPL says. The GPL talk > about redistribution of code and binaries, and the constituents that are > _linked_ together to define that binary. If libftd2xx is not statically > linked, or even not distributed along with the compiled OpenOCD binary, > then the case against it is highly arguable and far from being a black > and white picture but rather a large gray spot. Not admitting to this > is pure ideology. At the least, it's a grey spot with a big target painted on it! _______________________________________________ Openocd-development mailing list Openocd-development@lists.berlios.de https://lists.berlios.de/mailman/listinfo/openocd-development
