Jim Henderson escreveu:
> On Wed, 28 Jan 2009 18:46:27 -0800, Darren New wrote:
> 
>> So you said "The GPL only affects those who modify the code." This is
>> factually wrong, as evidenced by my example.
> 
> No, it's not factually wrong.
> 
> I just purchased X-Plane 9.  It uses openAL, openGL and a slew of other 
> libraries.
> 
> X-Plane is a proprietary software package that links to these libraries 
> which IIRC are licensed under the GPL.
> 
> If Austin (the author of X-Plane) had incorporated the libraries into his 
> binary by compiling the code as part, then yes, he would've had to 
> license his whole software package under the GPL.  He didn't and he's 
> within the requirements of using GPL libraries.
> 
> The argument about "linking means you have to release your code under the 
> GPL" has been disproven time and time again.

Hmm, this sounds weird.  You mean dynamic linking an app against a GPL 
lib doesn't require one to GPL the app code as well?  If so, what's the 
point of the LGPL?

And I didn't know OpenGL was GPL'd.  In fact, it's a specification only. 
  Are you talking about the mesa lib?

Post a reply to this message