Tech Insider					     Technology and Trends

			      USENET Archives

From: pmacdona@sanjuan (Peter MacDonald)
Subject: Which licence is use for libs?
Date: Thu, 18 Jun 92 16:17:32 GMT writes:
> So, my quistion is this: How much of the library isn't under GLGPL, and
> is there any hope to improve the situation?

Hmmm.  You know, if the program is distributed as a .a, it doesn't contain
any library code at all!  Therefore the GLGPL doesn't apply.  Could it
be that Linus, in designing his simple shared libs scheme, has come
up with a work-around to the GLGPL?  Wow, what intuition!

I too would like to see this specified.  Personally, I would like companies
to be free to build applications on top of Linux, and be free to keep 
their source code, BUT any enhancements or bug fixes they make to Linux
or it's array of support programs, MUST be released.

Unfortunately, I am not an expert in this area, and do not fully understand
all of the implications.  But there must be some way that we can allow
companies to accept Linux, and develop applications for it.  Otherwise,
Linux will be doomed, like most other small SW ventures, to be smothered
under the marketing clout of such giants as MS and IBM.

Vendors SHOULD distibute programs as .a's anyways, just so that 
upgrading the libraries doesn't affect them.


			      USENET Archives

The materials and information included in this website may only be used
for purposes such as criticism, review, private study, scholarship, or 

Electronic mail:			       WorldWideWeb: