Hi Øyvind, Originally I intended to let the discussion settle and see how things develop. Looks like there are still misunderstandings and I can't resist...
Øyvind Harboe wrote: > Under Windows an executable will fail to load if it links > implicitly to a dll even if that dll is not used. When using LoadLibrary, the executable will be loaded and will run, even if the loaded library is not available. > It's prefectly legitimate to have a GPL compliant dll that > may not be present on the system. So far so good. It's perfectly legitimate to _distribute_ a *GPL compliant* DLL with GPL'ed executables. It's perfectly legitimate to _run_ a *non GPL compliant* DLL with GPL'ed executables. The intention of GPL is to explicitly give users the freedom to use GPL software in any way they see fit. > Transparent attempts at circumventing GPL lie down this > same path, so keep your eyes peeled :-) AFAIK, adding support for a non-compliant DLL in GPL code is not circumventing any GPL clause that I know of, neither directly not indirectly. Harald _______________________________________________ Openocd-development mailing list Openocd-development@lists.berlios.de https://lists.berlios.de/mailman/listinfo/openocd-development
