> From: mono-list-boun...@lists.ximian.com [mailto:mono-list- > boun...@lists.ximian.com] On Behalf Of Robert Jordan > > On 05.08.2015 18:40, Andres G. Aragoneses wrote: > >>> I hope you've considered the licensing implications. In particular, > >>> if you distribute the mono runtime with an application, your > >>> application will need to be GPL. > >> The runtime is LGPL. > > > > But AFAIU when you use mkbundle you're not "l"inking anymore, you're > > joining everything together in one executable. So then the result must > > be LGPL as well. > > Only if mkbundle's --static option is used. Otherwise (w/out --static), > the bundled app is still dynamically loading the LGPLed runtime > (libmono*.so) => the license of the bundled app does not need > to be LGPL compatible.
This is emphatically a lawyer question. Are you a lawyer? The legal implication of static linking files is a fuzzy one - What if you're not static linked but then your application gets distributed in a zip file or some other package that joins them all into a single file? What if that package file is self-executable? Very fuzzy. _______________________________________________ Mono-list maillist - Mono-list@lists.ximian.com http://lists.ximian.com/mailman/listinfo/mono-list
