> Date: Wed, 16 Jul 2025 06:20:42 -0700 (PDT) > Cc: gcc@gcc.gnu.org, jwakely....@gmail.com, qifan.z...@xpeedic.com > From: ken...@adacore.com (Richard Kenner) > > > AFAIU, this is accurate if libgcc and libstdc++ are linked statically, > > but not if the program is linked to their DLL versions (and therefore > > the DLLs must be distributed with the resulting program). In the > > latter case, the LGPL exception doesn't apply, and distributing these > > DLLs falls under GPL instead. > > Perhaps (I'm not sure that I fully agree with that), but even if so, I > think the consequences aren't serious because the DLL's we're talking about > aren't normally distributed along with the program, but rather are > expected to be part of the user's environment.
Not if we are talking about Windows binaries intended to be used by people who don't have GCC installed. (The OP asked about MinGW, which is why I bring up this case.) These DLLs are part of the MinGW GCC installation, but do not come with the OS OOTB. Also, if the DLLs are not distributed with the programs, there's always a possibility of a version mismatch: the DLLs the end-user has on his/her system could be subtly incompatible. In extreme cases, the Windows loader will refuse to run the program due to such incompatibilities. > > Whether this means the source code of the > > compiled program must also be made available, I don't know. > > I don't see how it could, but again, we're not in the position of > giving legal advice on this list. If somebody cares, they should > get a legal opinion. Of course.
