[Mono-list] REá: [Mono-list] using lgpl in mono class libraries
Wed, 11 Jul 2001 10:25:07 +0200
I fully agree with Per on that one. The reason for the mono project is
to be able to run .net framework-based apps to run on linux systems
without modification, isn't it ?
Moreover, if the source code is linked to the .net Microsoft class, when
does the Microsoft License and when does the LGPL license apply ? Would
all software which "might" be able to run on the Mono classes be covered
by the LGPL? Or only when the software is run on Linux? On the latter,
it's the user responsability if the Mono framework is to run an
application, not the developpers : you can't enforce a license model on
all software devs.
What do you think guys?
-------- Message d'Origine--------
De: Per Bothner
Date: 11/07/2001 05:09:35
Objet: [Mono-list] using lgpl in mono class libraries
You may not realize that LGPL'd code is difficult or impossible to use
for embedded systems, due to the requirement for being able to re-link
the application. Therefore Cygnus has never shipped LGPL'd "target"
libraries (code that gets linked with the application so it can run
on the target). These libraries, which include libgcc, libstdc++,
libgcj, and "newlib" (an ansi C library for embedded system) have
used what we call the libgcc copyright, which is GPL with exception:
As a special exception, if you link this library with other files
to produce an executable, this library does not by itself cause
the resulting executable to be covered by the GNU General Public
License. This exception does not however invalidate any other
reasons why the executable file might be covered by the GNU
General Public License.
Of course any code that depends on Gnome might as well be LGPL.
However, you might want to consider a libgcc-style license
for "core" (non-GUI) classes. But of course it is up to you.
(Stallman has mixed feelings about both LGPL and the libgcc-license.)
[I am not on the mono-list, so please cc me on any discussion.]
Mono-list maillist - Monoemail@example.com