On 6/6/08, Alessandro Zummo <azummo-lists at towertech.it> wrote: > On Fri, 06 Jun 2008 09:24:25 +0900 > > Olaf Meeuwissen <olaf.meeuwissen at avasys.jp> wrote: > > > > > If GPL'd code uses a non-compatible library via dlopen that's just as > > much a violation as linking to it directly. The code runs in the same > > process space. That makes the combined work a derivative, so, all the > > terms of the GPL need to be met. > > > I'm not a lawyer, but I'm not sure of this. I always thought > that using dynamic linking would allow for a proper separation > of GPL/non-GPL code. > > That means that a GPL caller and a non-GPL library should be > ok, while the inverse it's not.
gpl faq is pretty clear on this one: If the modules are included in the same executable file, they are definitely combined in one program. If modules are designed to run linked together in a shared address space, that almost surely means combining them into one program. By contrast, pipes, sockets and command-line arguments are communication mechanisms normally used between two separate programs. So when they are used for communication, the modules normally are separate programs. But if the semantics of the communication are intimate enough, exchanging complex internal data structures, that too could be a basis to consider the two parts as combined into a larger program. source: http://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl-faq.html#MereAggregation allan -- "The truth is an offense, but not a sin"
