On 07/24/2016 02:47 AM, Daniel Espinosa wrote: > By review your comment against LGPL, and with same advertising I am not a > lawyer, if you provide your object files, you are not forced to distribute > the tools to generate binaries but instructions to do so. > > Android and iOS have tools to do so available to the users, then is a > matter to the users to create object files for GLib and use that tools to > create the binaries and installation package, using your object files. > > You should provide a way to the users to download your object object files > and instructions to create binaries with links to available instructions in > each target platform. > > Doing above, should be possible to use GLib/Vala in your project. > This is for static linking. I don’t know what is common on Android, but it is simpler to dynamically link with GLib (as a *.so/*.dll/…), then all the user needs to do to use a different GLib is replace the one *.so/*.dll file. I am not sure, but I believe this requirement can therefore be fulfilled by a) using dynamic linking and b) providing the source code for GLib and any other LGPL library. If you are *only* using LGPLv2 libraries and no LGPLv3, then I believe this is enough even if Digital Restrictions Management prevents the user from actually replacing the *.so/*.dll file, but IANAL. Regards, Florian Pelz
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
_______________________________________________ gtk-list mailing list gtk-list@xxxxxxxxx https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gtk-list
