Date: Mon, 15 Mar 1999 13:31:32 -0700 From: Brett Glass <brett@lariat.org> To: Dag-Erling Smorgrav <des@flood.ping.uio.no>, Donald Wilde <dwilde1@thuntek.net> Cc: Dag-Erling Smorgrav <des@flood.ping.uio.no>, freebsd-advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: License nightmare Message-ID: <4.1.19990315131545.03fc2510@localhost> In-Reply-To: <xzp90cyms12.fsf@flood.ping.uio.no> References: <Donald Wilde's message of "Mon, 15 Mar 1999 13:08:54 -0700"> <36ED1F21.12E97D6D@thuntek.net> <xzpogluo9e0.fsf@flood.ping.uio.no> <36ED68D6.C7820CAD@thuntek.net>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
At 09:12 PM 3/15/99 +0100, Dag-Erling Smorgrav wrote: >Richard Stallman has very specificly stated that this is not the case. Yes, this is true. However, Stallman has now begun to advocate the use of the GPL on various runtime libraries. (See http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/why-not-lgpl.html for more on this.) If you fall into the "trap" of using one of these libraries in a commercial application (and it's set up to be a "trap," in that RMS advocates that the GPL be used on libraries which aren't available elsewhere), you must reveal your source code. LibGTop is an example of a library which Stallman insisted upon releasing under the GPL rather than the LGPL. So do be careful. --Brett To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-advocacy" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?4.1.19990315131545.03fc2510>