Vo Minh Thu <not...@gmail.com> writes: > For a LGPL library, why do you make the distinction between open > source and proprietary applications? They can all link to a LGPL > library.
The "problem" with the LGPL is that in order to distribute a program using an LGPL library, the recipient must be allowed to replace the LGPL'ed component with a modified version. When source is available, this is not a problem, of course. For closed source software, this can be solved by having the LGPL bit be a dynamic/shared library, or by distributing the rest of the application as a set of .o files, allowing recipients to relink the application themselves. Both of these approaches are problematic with the current state of GHC. -k -- If I haven't seen further, it is by standing in the footprints of giants _______________________________________________ Haskell-Cafe mailing list Haskell-Cafe@haskell.org http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe
