[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread] 

List:       postgresql-general
Subject:    Re: [GENERAL] About GPL and proprietary software
From:       Bruce Momjian <pgman () candle ! pha ! pa ! us>
Date:       2003-08-31 23:37:47
[Download RAW message or body]

Ron Johnson wrote:
> On Sun, 2003-08-31 at 14:57, Michael Meskes wrote:
> > On Sun, Aug 31, 2003 at 02:26:14PM -0500, Ron Johnson wrote:
> > > IANAL, but according to my understanding
> > > (1) proprietary s/w that dynamically links to "GPL" shared libraries
> > > has not broken the GPL.
> > 
> > Sure? My understanding is that it does break GPL. That's why there's an
> > LGPL.
> 
> Well, there's this:
> http://www.fsf.org/licenses/gpl-faq.html#LinkingWithGPL
> and this:
> http://www.fsf.org/licenses/gpl-faq.html#LinkingOverControlledInterface
> http://lists.gnupg.org/pipermail/gnupg-devel/2000-April/010043.html
> 
> Linus thinks that dynamic linking is ok, RMS doesn't, but gives
> an example boilerplate that says how dynamic linking can be ok
> w/ the GPL.  It's definitely a grey area.

Right, dynamic linking is a case where RMS would like the GPL to spread
the the closed-source binary, but I don't think he can legally do that.

We do have that issue with our linking in of libreadline.  We may adopt
libedit someday for that very reason.

I researched this a little recently for Joe Conway.

-- 
  Bruce Momjian                        |  http://candle.pha.pa.us
  pgman@candle.pha.pa.us               |  (610) 359-1001
  +  If your life is a hard drive,     |  13 Roberts Road
  +  Christ can be your backup.        |  Newtown Square, Pennsylvania 19073

---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 3: if posting/reading through Usenet, please send an appropriate
      subscribe-nomail command to majordomo@postgresql.org so that your
      message can get through to the mailing list cleanly
[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread]