From: MagerValp (MagerValp_at_cling.gu.se)
Date: 2002-03-28 17:18:47
>>>>> "MM" == Mike McCarty <jmccarty_at_ssd.usa.alcatel.com> writes:
>> The Simple DirectMedia Layer library is currently available under
>> the GNU Lesser General Public License (LGPL) version 2 or newer.
>> This license allows you to link with the library in such a way that
>> users can modify the library and have your application use the new
>> version.
MM> This, at least, is correct. But if their library actually becomes
MM> a part of your program, then your program source must also be
MM> supplied, AIUI.
MM> So, if your platform does not support dynamic linking, then this LGPL
MM> code cannot be used on it without the GPL virus attaching itself to your
MM> own code.
Yes, the LGPL license was created with modern platforms in mind, and
they support dynamic linking. I think there might even be a workaround
for platforms that don't support dynamic linking -- ship the .o and .a
and have the install script link them on the user's machine when the
program is started, or something like that.
MM> The licenses for most software are designed to take away your
MM> freedom to share and change it.
MM> This is false. Licenses *grant* permission, they do not *deny*
MM> freedom. A license *cannot* deny anyone any freedom.
True, but many licenses are more restrictive than they have to be. The
EULA of a random commercial application is usually in violation of
consumer laws in at least a couple of western countries.
MM> By contrast, the GNU General Public Licenses are intended to
MM> guarantee your freedom to share and change free software--to
MM> make sure the software is free for all its users.
MM> This is false. They are designed to ensure that
MM> commercial/proprietary developers cannot use their code.
No, they are free to do whatever they want with the product, as long
as they give due credit for derived works and release the source code
along with it. Freely available source code does not necessarily pro-
hibit commercial exploitation, as has been demonstrated several times
(e.g. Sun and Solaris).
FWIW I think the (L)GPL has its uses. It is rather restrictive, but it
tries to protect the end user. But either way, the author is free to
choose his or her own license, and there's not a thing you can do
about it. If Ullrich doesn't like the GPL, that's that.
--
___ . . . . . + . . o
_|___|_ + . + . + . Per Olofsson, arkadspelare
o-o . . . o + MagerValp_at_cling.gu.se
- + + . http://www.cling.gu.se/~cl3polof/
----------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe from the list send mail to majordomo_at_musoftware.de with
the string "unsubscribe cc65" in the body(!) of the mail.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.3 : 2002-03-28 17:22:16 CET