Re: FW: [Glade-devel] RE: Win32 port of GTK+2.6.1

[John Ehresman <jpe wingide com>]

Tor Lillqvist wrote:
> Also, as the MSVCR7*.DLL are not part of the operating system like
> MSVCRT.DLL, it's against the (L)GPL to distribute (L)GPL software that
> would use MSVCR7*.DLL. (I am not a lawyer, but this seems to be the
> common interpretation of the situation.) Thus, now and in the
> foreseeable future, (L)GPL software for Windows should continue to use
> MSVCRT.DLL.

IANAL, but isn't the situation different w/ GPL v the LGPL?  LGPL allows 
linking with non-opensource components.

> I strongly advice people who might still insist on building GLib, GTK+
> etc themselves with MSVC 7.* and to use MSVCR7*.DLL to use different
> names for their DLLs, to avoid confusion. The "standard" DLL names
> that a mingw build produces should be used only for DLLs that use
> MSVCRT.DLL. Otherwise there will be no end of confusion if and when
> there starts to appear various distributions of GTK+ etc built to use
> different C runtimes but using the same DLL names.

Yes, the names should be changed.  Note that this situation is almost 
certainly going to become more common as more software will be built 
using MSVC 7+.

John