Once upon a time, John Haxby <jch@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> said: > Incidentally, did you know that if you are linking statically against > glibc (and libstdc) that your application is necessarily covered by the > LGPL or the GPL? I accidentally fell foul of this a while ago which is > how I found out (I think it was someone at Red Hat that spotted it. First of all, your code doesn't fall under the GPL or LGPL if you don't distribute anything (source or binaries). The GPL and LGPL only govern distribution. If you statically link against a library under the LGPL (like libc), you must provide object code so someone can re-link against a different version (which doesn't always work out in practice as the headers change also from libc version to libc version sometimes). Otherwise, your code falls under the LGPL as well and you must provide source. If you link (statically or dynamically) against a library under the GPL (like libstdc++, which IIRC gets linked automatically when you use g++), your code falls under the GPL and you must provide source. If you think you might ever distribute something you are writing, you should always check the licenses of every library you use, as there are some libraries that come with most Linux and *BSD distributions that are under the GPL, some under the LGPL, and some that have their own licenses. -- Chris Adams <cmadams@xxxxxxxxxx> Systems and Network Administrator - HiWAAY Internet Services I don't speak for anybody but myself - that's enough trouble. -- Shrike-list mailing list Shrike-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/shrike-list
