Lpc2000

Adam Goode ha scritto:

>On Thu, 2005-11-17 at 14:55 -0500, Tom Walsh wrote:
>  
>
>>Tom Walsh wrote:
>>    
>>
>>>No, read the license discussions on other websites.  If you statically 
>>>link proprietary code to GPL code, then you must release source, if you 
>>>dynamically link at runtime, then you do not have to distribute source 
>>>of your application.  However, you must distribute the object files of 
>>>the proprietary application.
>>> 
>>>
>>>      
>>>
>>Correction on my part: LGPL static linking requires object modules to be 
>>available from the proprietary app. Not GPL, in either case where you 
>>dynamically link at runtime, you can protect your proprietary source.  
>>Static linking is where the problems can arise.
>>
>>    
>>
>
>Actually, according to the FSF, you cannot use GPL code with non-GPL
>code even while dynamically linking.
>
>http://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl-faq.html#GPLInProprietarySystem
>http://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl-faq.html#LinkingWithGPL
>
>
>An exception seems to be if you are using the a GPL library where you
>call into it in a plugin-style form of use.
>
>http://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl-faq.html#NFUseGPLPlugins
>
>
>
>Adam
>
>
>  
>
Ok guys, this i s pure theory. What may happen if anyone changes or 
extend some part of code? And what happens if anyone include GPL source 
code in an embedded project and he don't say that? In practice it is 
virtually impossible to be sure that nobody includes some source code 
parts extracted from other source codes (not only gpl, lgpl or open source).

>[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>
>
>
>
> 
>Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
> 
>
>
>
>
>  
>


  ----------

No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition.
Version: 7.1.362 / Virus Database: 267.13.3/173 - Release Date: 16/11/2005


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]