From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.4 (2020-01-24) on polar.synack.me X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.3 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,INVALID_MSGID autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit X-Google-Thread: 1025b4,43ae7f61992b3213 X-Google-Attributes: gid1025b4,public X-Google-Thread: 103376,faf964ea4531e6af X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public From: David Starner Subject: Re: GPL and "free" software Date: 1999/04/29 Message-ID: <3728B4BE.EE06316C@aasaa.ofe.org>#1/1 X-Deja-AN: 472425020 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit References: <7fibd5$jc7$1@news2.tor.accglobal.net> <7g5cb2$bjn$1@netnews.upenn.edu> <7g7o6d$lrj$1@flotsam.uits.indiana.edu> <925402294.548.49@news.remarQ.com> <3728AAFA.FAD4A827@doc.ic.ac.uk> X-Accept-Language: en Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Organization: Oklahoma State University Mime-Version: 1.0 Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada,gnu.misc.discuss Date: 1999-04-29T00:00:00+00:00 List-Id: Ed Avis wrote: > > Fraser Wilson wrote: > > >Ada libraries are commonly distributed with this additional freedom: > > > >-- As a special exception, if other files instantiate generics from this -- > >-- unit, or you link this unit with other files to produce an executable, -- > >-- this unit does not by itself cause the resulting executable to be -- > >-- covered by the GNU General Public License. > > That seems silly. Why not just distribute them under the LGPL, which > is basically the GPL with the above exception built in? Because with a template based library, it can be virtually impossible to sepearte the library and program in the way that the LGPL requires. The only way to permit relinking would be to include source files for the program, something not acceptable for proprietary programs.