On Fri, Nov 24, 2006 at 03:05:27PM -0600, Chris Adams wrote: > > > The LGPL requires any work statically linked to the library be > > > distributed with (or with an offer for) the source and/or object code so > > > that the end-user can modify the library and relink the work. > No, the difference is that the vendor can include only object code; > source code is not required. The GPL makes no mention of linking > (static or dynamic). Ah, OK, I had missed the and/or in your statement above. In that case we agree, the LGPL doesn't require source code. And what I learned is that it requires you to ship object code, not only the final executable. I wonder how many ISVs really do that. Or whether they argue that the statically build exectuable can be dismantled with binutils. > I really suggest you read the license; you have a copy (or maybe more > than one) on your system. It is pretty straight forward. OK, I admit, you were right and I need to learn to read. :) -- Axel.Thimm at ATrpms.net
Attachment:
pgpwx1IAIl3Fc.pgp
Description: PGP signature
-- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
