Jim Henderson wrote:
> You can link to GPL libraries.  There are plenty of examples of this.

Then what's the LGPL for?

Note that OpenAL is apparently LGPL, so it specifically says you can link to 
it without invoking the GPL.

> What you cannot do is incorporate GPL-licensed code into non-GPL licensed 
> code.

Define "incorporate"? Look at the first paragraph of
http://www.fsf.org/licensing/licenses/why-not-lgpl.html

It doesn't sound like the FSF agrees with you.

> There is, AFAIK, one single exception - if you own the code, you can dual-
> license it. 

Unless it's a plug-in for GCC.

> But if you're building something large and you want to leverage code 
> others have written, you have to respect their license terms (whatever 
> that license is, not just if it's GPL).

Agreed. I'm not arguing the GPL is a bad thing, even. I'm simply pointing 
out that a lot of the slogans promoted by FSF supporters are wrong.

The gcc changes aren't aimed at making sure the plug-ins are "free 
software". They're aimed at making sure the plug-ins are "copyleft".

-- 
   Darren New, San Diego CA, USA (PST)
   "Ouch ouch ouch!"
   "What's wrong? Noodles too hot?"
   "No, I have Chopstick Tunnel Syndrome."

Post a reply to this message