Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S261623AbVDTNiV (ORCPT ); Wed, 20 Apr 2005 09:38:21 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S261626AbVDTNiV (ORCPT ); Wed, 20 Apr 2005 09:38:21 -0400 Received: from pentafluge.infradead.org ([213.146.154.40]:40854 "EHLO pentafluge.infradead.org") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S261623AbVDTNiA (ORCPT ); Wed, 20 Apr 2005 09:38:00 -0400 Subject: Re: GPL violation by CorAccess? From: Arjan van de Ven To: Steven Rostedt Cc: Bernd Petrovitsch , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Karel Kulhavy , Lennart Sorensen , linux-os@analogic.com, Chris Friesen In-Reply-To: <1114002429.774.45.camel@localhost.localdomain> References: <20050419175743.GA8339@beton.cybernet.src> <20050419182529.GT17865@csclub.uwaterloo.ca> <42656319.6090703@nortel.com> <42659620.5050002@nortel.com> <1113982209.3803.7.camel@gimli.at.home> <1114001398.774.40.camel@localhost.localdomain> <1114001836.6238.68.camel@laptopd505.fenrus.org> <1114002429.774.45.camel@localhost.localdomain> Content-Type: text/plain Date: Wed, 20 Apr 2005 15:37:49 +0200 Message-Id: <1114004269.6238.72.camel@laptopd505.fenrus.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Evolution 2.0.4 (2.0.4-2) Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Spam-Score: 3.7 (+++) X-Spam-Report: SpamAssassin version 2.63 on pentafluge.infradead.org summary: Content analysis details: (3.7 points, 5.0 required) pts rule name description ---- ---------------------- -------------------------------------------------- 1.1 RCVD_IN_DSBL RBL: Received via a relay in list.dsbl.org [] 2.5 RCVD_IN_DYNABLOCK RBL: Sent directly from dynamic IP address [80.57.133.107 listed in dnsbl.sorbs.net] 0.1 RCVD_IN_SORBS RBL: SORBS: sender is listed in SORBS [80.57.133.107 listed in dnsbl.sorbs.net] X-SRS-Rewrite: SMTP reverse-path rewritten from by pentafluge.infradead.org See http://www.infradead.org/rpr.html Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1289 Lines: 29 On Wed, 2005-04-20 at 09:07 -0400, Steven Rostedt wrote: > On Wed, 2005-04-20 at 14:57 +0200, Arjan van de Ven wrote: > > On Wed, 2005-04-20 at 08:49 -0400, Steven Rostedt wrote: > > > On Wed, 2005-04-20 at 09:30 +0200, Bernd Petrovitsch wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > As long as they do not statically link against LGPL (or GPL) code and as > > > > long as they do not link dynamically agaist GPL code. And there are > > > > probably more rules ..... > > > > > > > > > > Actually, I believe that the LGPL allows for static linking as well. > > > > it does, as long as you provide the .o files of your own stuff so that > > the end user can relink with say a bugfixed version of library. > > I don't see that in the license. As point 5 showed: "Such a > work, in isolation, is not a derivative work of the Library, and you missed the point "in isolation". If you do NOT link against the lib, eg your app in isolation, you don't have to care abuot the LGPL. That is what it says. The moment you do link you are no longer "in isolation". - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/