On Sat, Nov 15, 2008 at 03:04:29AM -0500, Nicolas Pitre wrote:
libgcc is a dynamic library on most modern systems these days. Yet they routinely execute non-GPL programs. If that text intentionally excluded the dynamic case then every non-GPL applications on such systems would have been breaking the license for a long time. So I don't think anyone could have substance for such a claim.
Sure they can. Lack of enforcement doesn't dilute copyright like it does trademark. It may be that the gcc authors intend for it to be allowed for dynamic libraries, and therefore wouldn't sue for that usage, but that's not what they're saying in their license. What I'm saying is that if I was in a position to review the license and determine what was permitted, this license with exception does not appear to allow dynamic linking against the library. It doesn't explicitly forbid this, but it is ambiguous about it. David -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe git" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
