Re: [sigc] Linking dynamically with SigC++ (now rather: License)

[Aristid Breitkreuz <aribrei arcor de>]

Am Mittwoch, den 05.07.2006, 18:49 +0200 schrieb Ulrich Eckhardt:
> > I no longer need to know whether it's possible to link dynamically. The
> > reason I wanted to know that had something to do with the LGPL license
> > and someone thought we needed to link dynamically or otherwise publish
> > object files or source code files.
> 
> That's true. LGPL requires that people are able to relink your executable with 
> a modified version of the LGPLed code, so either you ship objectfiles or use 
> dynamic linking. Or, of course, provide the source.

I was once told that sigc++ had no intent of being such restrictive. I
asked for a more liberal license because such requirements are not
acceptable for my needs. This is why for myself I switched to
MPL/GPL/LGPL triple-license. But I was told that
     1. sigc++ showed their intent clearly on the website.
     2. changing license would be a long-term thing.

But now I read that those restrictions DO apply. Shall I move away from
libsigc++?

> 
> Uli

Aristid