This is the mail archive of the
mailing list for the pthreas-win32 project.
Re: Static linking under win32
- From: Alexander Terekhov <TEREKHOV at de dot ibm dot com>
- To: "Gili" <junk at bbs dot darktech dot org>
- Cc: "Phil Frisbie, Jr." <phil at hawksoft dot com>, "pthreads-win32 at sources dot redhat dot com" <pthreads-win32 at sources dot redhat dot com>
- Date: Mon, 6 Dec 2004 19:53:13 +0100
- Subject: Re: Static linking under win32
> I think the point of conflict is more about what people
> *percieve* LGPL to be about.
BTW, here's rather interesting review of the [L]GPL by OSI's
"These sections of the LGPL are an impenetrable maze of
technological babble. They should not be in a general-purpose
software license. The LGPL even concedes that âthe threshold
for this to be true is not precisely defined by law.â (LGPL
section 5.) A licensee under these provisions wonât have a
clue how extensive his or her good faith efforts must be when
creating a derivative work in accordance with sections 2(d)
and 5 of the LGPL.
The LGPL, therefore, is an anomaly -- a hybrid license intended
to address a complex issue about program linking and derivative
works. It doesnât solve that problem but merely directs us back
to the main event, the GPL license itself."
Well, I guess the idea is to simply convert LGPL'ed works to the
"plain" GPL (the LGPL allows this) and stick to the OSI's much
more reasonable (first sale aside for a moment) interprepretation
completely ignoring FSF's politically motivated licensing
smokescreens (I mean their FAQ/quiz/essays/manifestos/etc.)
Now enjoy reading that sample chapter (and consider buying that
book as a whole ;-) ).