Re: Move to LGPL3

Lieven van der Heide wrote:
Ok, according to the matrix on

it's indeed not allowed, although I don't really understand why.

Mathias pointed out exactly why. It's not that linking GPLv2-only to LGPLv3 violates the LGPLv3 license of the library. Linking a GPLv2-only app to a LGPLv3 library actually violates the app's its own license. The GPL in general doesn't allow linking to libraries with more restrictive licenses[1], and the LGPLv3 is more restrictive than GPLv2-only.


[1] The exception being for supposed "platform" libraries; e.g., you can link to Microsoft's C runtime even though it's closed source because it's a standard interface that can be considered part of the OS. I believe Sven quoted the exact bit from the GPL in another post.

On 3/18/08, Lieven van der Heide <lievenvanderheide gmail com> wrote:
Does that really apply for the code you link to? Afaik, if a GPL
 program uses an LGPL library, it doesn't relicense that library under
 GPL too, it merely links to it, and leaves it up to the user to make
 sure the library is available. If this would be the case, than it
 wouldn't be possible for GPL code to use something like the Windows
 API or DirectX either.

 I think the restriction from the link you posted only apply to GPL
 libraries, but not LGPL.

 On 3/17/08, Mathias Hasselmann <mathias hasselmann gmx de> wrote:
 >  Am Montag, den 17.03.2008, 00:31 +0100 schrieb Mathias Hasselmann:
 > > I am really wondering what's the reason for FSF claiming, that
 >  > programs
 >  > licenced GPL-2 only are not allowed to use LGPL-3 libraries. The LGPL-3
 >  > allows non-free, proprietary programs to use LGPL-3 libraries, but
 >  > excludes free software, licensed GPL-2 only? This sounds absurd to me!
 >  >
 >  > Is the FSF spreading FUD with their license matrix? Why doesn't the
 >  > matrix have footnotes explaining that absurd conflict?
 > Ok, it is not FUD. It seems the problem is, that LGPLv3 imposes
 >  additional restrictions not found in the GPLv2. So it isn't the LGPLv3
 >  that forbids LGPLv3 libraries to be used by GPLv2-only programs. It is
 >  the GPLv2 which forbids to linking against libraries more restrictive
 >  than itself.
 >  See
 >  for details.
 >  In theory LGPLv3 allows addition of exceptions, but they have to be
 >  approved by all copyright holders. Doubt this will happen. So only
 >  chance for upgrading to a new version of the LGPL is waiting for an FSF
 >  approved version of the LGPL, which drops those additional restrictions
 >  for GPLv2-only programs.
 >  Total insanity...
 >  Ciao,
 >  Mathias
 >  --
 >  Mathias Hasselmann <mathias hasselmann gmx de>
 >  Openismus GmbH:
 >  Personal Site:

 >  gtk-devel-list mailing list
 >  gtk-devel-list gnome org

gtk-devel-list mailing list
gtk-devel-list gnome org

[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]