Re: [sigc] LGPL licensing issues regarding C++
- From: Aristid Breitkreuz <aribrei arcor de>
- To: Brett Viren <bv bnl gov>
- Cc: libsigc-list gnome org
- Subject: Re: [sigc] LGPL licensing issues regarding C++
- Date: Mon, 23 Jan 2006 20:30:36 +0100
Hi,
Brett Viren wrote:
>How are LGPLed C++ libs considered problematic? Can you provide a
>link to where you read this?
>
>
Especially this one:
http://gcc.gnu.org/onlinedocs/libstdc++/17_intro/license.html and some
earlier post on this list which I read some time ago in an archive. If
the LGPL is problematic for the libstdc++ folks it probably is really
problematic. I'm no lawyer though (unfortunately in this case).
>Maybe this has something to do with LGPLed template headers compiled
>in to non-LGPLed main programs?
>
>
"The LGPL requires that users be able to replace the LGPL code with a
modified version" (the problem named by the libstdc++ authors) - again,
I'm no lawyer to interpret this.
>-Brett.
>
>
Aristid (probably hard to pronounce ;-)
[
Date Prev][
Date Next] [
Thread Prev][Thread Next]
[
Thread Index]
[
Date Index]
[
Author Index]