Date: Fri, 21 Feb 1997 17:48:32 -0700 (MST) From: Terry Lambert <terry@lambert.org> To: sef@Kithrup.COM (Sean Eric Fagan) Cc: nate@trout.mt.sri.com, hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: RMS's view on dynamic linking Message-ID: <199702220048.RAA02282@phaeton.artisoft.com> In-Reply-To: <199702220011.QAA05847@kithrup.com> from "Sean Eric Fagan" at Feb 21, 97 04:11:07 pm
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> The LGPL was written to allow shared libraries to be created using LGPL'd > code; this was stated by many people involved with the creation of the LGPL > (I worked with/for some of them, and the issue came up *many* times). > > Ignore Terry when he comes up and talks about how the LGPL doesn't work. ;) You mean the fact that initialized data for a shared library is linked into the executable image itself "doesn't count" for some reason which RMS refuses to put into writing in the LGPL itself? Or the fact that you *could* make it work with ELF and segment coloring, but not even Linux actually does this? Or are we back to the "use = derivation" vs. "use = utilization" argument. 8-|. Foo. Terry Lambert terry@lambert.org --- Any opinions in this posting are my own and not those of my present or previous employers.
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?199702220048.RAA02282>