Return-Path: Subject: Re: [Bluez-users] Linking to BlueZ from non-GPL code From: Fredy P To: bluez-users@lists.sourceforge.net In-Reply-To: <1117662296.31350.31.camel@pegasus> References: <1117662296.31350.31.camel@pegasus> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Message-Id: <1117688464.3908.6.camel@localhost.localdomain> Mime-Version: 1.0 Sender: bluez-users-admin@lists.sourceforge.net Errors-To: bluez-users-admin@lists.sourceforge.net Reply-To: bluez-users@lists.sourceforge.net List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: BlueZ users List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , List-Archive: Date: Thu, 02 Jun 2005 00:01:04 -0500 El mi=E9, 01-06-2005 a las 23:44 +0200, Marcel Holtmann escribi=F3: > Hi Trevor, >=20 > > I have a question about linking non-GPL code to BlueZ. This is > > very much along the lines of the previous conversation at=20 > > http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.linux.bluez.devel/2444 -- the quick > > summary of which is:=20 > > =20 > > Marcel: Date: 2004-06-28 14:48:48 GMT: "For the BlueZ library and the > > utilities we can talk about it. Some time ago people asked for a LGPL > > version of the library and actually I tend to agree with that. However > > this can't be decided by me alone, because part of the code is copyrigh= t > > by Qualcomm and also by Maxim Krasnyansky himself. For the utilities I > > don't see any need for a different license. I believe in the GPL and > > from my view releasing the Linux Bluetooth library under LGPL is the > > only step I wanna make forward to allow closed source products based on > > BlueZ." > >=20 > > Is this still the current status of GPL/LGPL for the BlueZ libraries > > (libbluetooth.so) -- or has there been an update (I haven't found > > anything more recent on the mailing list about this). >=20 > nothing has changed at the moment. Ask Max for an update of changing the > BlueZ library from GPL to LGPL. For the free software and open source interest is not good idea change GPL to LGPL, can read this: http://www.gnu.org/licenses/why-not-lgpl.html >=20 > > What is the recommended way to write a non-GPL application on top of > > BlueZ, or is this not currently allowed...? My understanding is that it > > is OK to use the linux kernel syscall interface from non-GPL code, but > > that this would not extend to libbluetooth.so... >=20 > Actually I disagree with the non-GPL use of the syscall interface, but I > am not lawyer. From my understanding all the bluetooth/*.h include files > are GPL and you need them for your application. You can't replace them > without ending up in derived work. >=20 > Regards >=20 > Marcel >=20 >=20 >=20 >=20 > ------------------------------------------------------- > This SF.Net email is sponsored by Yahoo. > Introducing Yahoo! Search Developer Network - Create apps using Yahoo! > Search APIs Find out how you can build Yahoo! directly into your own > Applications - visit http://developer.yahoo.net/?fr=3Doffad-ysdn-ostg-q22= 005 > _______________________________________________ > Bluez-users mailing list > Bluez-users@lists.sourceforge.net > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bluez-users ------------------------------------------------------- This SF.Net email is sponsored by Yahoo. Introducing Yahoo! Search Developer Network - Create apps using Yahoo! Search APIs Find out how you can build Yahoo! directly into your own Applications - visit http://developer.yahoo.net/?fr=offad-ysdn-ostg-q22005 _______________________________________________ Bluez-users mailing list Bluez-users@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bluez-users