| From: | Stephan Szabo <sszabo(at)megazone23(dot)bigpanda(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Lamar Owen <lamar(dot)owen(at)wgcr(dot)org> |
| Cc: | Dann Corbit <DCorbit(at)connx(dot)com>, "scott(dot)marlowe" <scott(dot)marlowe(at)ihs(dot)com>, "Marc G(dot) Fournier" <scrappy(at)hub(dot)org>, mlw <pgsql(at)mohawksoft(dot)com>, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: contrib and licensing |
| Date: | 2003-04-03 02:59:03 |
| Message-ID: | 20030402185333.X70275-100000@megazone23.bigpanda.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Wed, 2 Apr 2003, Lamar Owen wrote:
> On Wednesday 02 April 2003 18:11, Dann Corbit wrote:
> [snip]
> > > True. But not linking to LGPLd libs would be a bit extreme there.
>
> > I disagree. Because of the language in the LGPL:
> > http://www.gnu.org/copyleft/lesser.txt
> >
> > I would not use LGPL tools in any finished commercial project. For me,
> > if PostgreSQL linked against LGPL libraries, it would kill its
> > usefulness for me completely.
>
> > "However, linking a "work that uses the Library" with the Library
> > creates an executable that is a derivative of the Library (because it
> > contains portions of the Library), rather than a "work that uses the
> > library". The executable is therefore covered by this License.
> > Section 6 states terms for distribution of such executables."
>
> <stifles ROTFL>
>
> Everyone does realize that on Linux PostgreSQL binaries link against glibc,
> which is LGPL......
I assume the standard dynamic linker counts as "a suitable shared library
mechanism for linking with the Library" as per LGPL 6b. ;)
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Andrew Sullivan | 2003-04-03 03:33:11 | Re: Detecting corrupted pages earlier |
| Previous Message | Lamar Owen | 2003-04-03 01:56:54 | Re: contrib and licensing |