On Sat, 27 Jun 2020, 16:52 JacobK622 via Gcc-help, <gcc-help@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > Thank you for letting me know about the subject line issue, I will strive to write more descriptive subject lines in the future. > Thank you for letting me know about the "reply to list only" part of netiquette, I will reply to the mailing list from now on. My apologies. > > Sorry for the long delay. I had some stuff going on, got distracted, and accidentally invented dehydrated water (jk lol). > > Anyway, I opened stdio.h in a text editor and it clearly stated that it was under the LGPL v2 or any later version. > sooo... what am I missing here? stdio.h is not part of GCC. Asking about the glibc licence on this mailing list is off-topic. I've already suggested you should talk to a lawyer if you don't understand the license. > > What is the email for the glibc list and would it be bad netiquette to post this there? See http://www.gnu.org/software/libc/libc.html > > "For questions about glibc's licence you should ask the glibc list or > consult a lawyer. The first paragraph of clause 5 of LGPL v2.1 seems > clear to me: > > 5. A program that contains no derivative of any portion of the > Library, but is designed to work with the Library by being compiled or > linked with it, is called a "work that uses the Library". Such a work, > in isolation, is not a derivative work of the Library, and therefore > falls outside the scope of this License." > > The sentence says "Such a work, in ISOLATION, is not a derivative work of the Library, and therefore falls outside the scope of this License.". If I wanted to distribute my code in source code form only then you would be right--the use of the libraries wouldn't affect the code, because they aren't combined. However (and I admit i may not have made this clear) but, I do intend on distributing it in object code form. (which would require that my code and the library be combined)) The second sentence in the LGPLv2.1 section 5 says "However, linking a "work that uses the Library" with the Library creates an executable that is a derivative of the Library (because it contains portions of the Library), rather than a "work that uses the library". The executable is therefore covered by this License. Section 6 states terms for distribution of such executables." > > Does anyone else have any suggestions? Talk to a lawyer.
