Bulba! wrote:
On 6 Jan 2005 19:01:46 -0500, [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Aahz) wrote:
Note that the so-called 'viral' nature of GPL code only applies to *modifications you make* to the GPL software. The *only* way in which your code can be 'infected' by the GPL is if you copy GPL source.
That's not true -- consider linking to a GPL library.
Will someone please explain to me in simple terms what's the difference between linking to LGPLed library and linking to GPLed library - obviously in terms of consequences of what happens to _your_ source code?
Because if there isn't any, why bother with distinguishing between the two?
Releasing a product in which your code is linked together with GPL'ed code requires that your code also be GPL'ed. The GPL goes to some lengths to define what exactly "linked together" means.
Releasing a product in which your code is linked together with LGPL'ed code does *not* require that your code also be (L)GPL'ed. Changes to the core library must still be released under (L)GPL, but application code which merely *uses* the library does not. (I've forgotten, now, exactly how LGPL defines this distinction...)
Jeff Shannon Technician/Programmer Credit International
-- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
