Having read the libstdc++ FAQ (esp. "The Code: Runtime GPL"), I'd like to get an confirmation about my understanding of the legal consequences of the Runtime GPL: Consider I'd like to distribute libstdc++.so inside a proprietary RPM. The libstd++-v3 FAQ makes it quite clear that there *is* a legal way to do this (due to the runtime exception), but it doesn't mention the consequences (http://gcc.gnu.org/onlinedocs/libstdc++/17_intro/license.html). A reader might get the impression that thanks to the exception he just might include the library file in the RPM and that's all. As far as I can see, that would be illegal, since all other requirements of the GPL regarding distribution of the library still hold true. Is that correct? Now what's requirements do I have to fulfill if I'd like to ship the library in a proprietary RPM? Do I have to include the text of the license (GPL+runtime exception)? Where do I have to include it, and where else do I have to mention the license and the files (just in the license file of the RPM, or must it be be mentioned in the Info panel of the GUI as well)? How about offering the source? If the library binary is taken unmodified from a Linux distribution? Perhaps it's just me, but I think including a short answer regarding these questions in the libstdc++ FAQ might help to avoid undeliberate violations of the license. Thanks in advance for any feedback, Gregor Hoffleit
