Subject: Re: LGPL clarification
From: Ian Lance Taylor <ian@airs.com>
Date: 1 Nov 2000 12:00:50 -0800

   Date: Wed, 1 Nov 2000 10:04:17 -0800 (PST)
   From: Ken Arromdee <arromdee@rahul.net>

   On 1 Nov 2000, Ian Lance Taylor wrote:
   > The LGPL puts restrictions on P when it is linked with L.  But so
   > what?  That linking will only happen on the end user system.  The
   > typical effect is that the end user is not permitted to distribute the
   > executable now found in memory, because it is impossible to satisfy
   > both the conditions of the vendor of P and the conditions of the LGPL.
   > 
   > But the LGPL puts no restrictions on the distribution of P, which is
   > what the proprietary user cares about.

   That is not, however, what RMS believes.  If there is only one shared library
   that exists, he considers P to be derivative of it even before it is linked;
   and this triggers all licensing conditions on L even if P is not distributed
   with L.  Remember readline?

readline is under the GPL.

I believe that the LGPL is supposed to permit this.  I've never heard
RMS claim otherwise.

Ian