Samuel Hocevar <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > However, if your printing server component is a library and is GPLed, > then every work linked to it has to be GPLed (or have an even less > restrictive license). > > > Also, is it relevant that at the moment the whole app. comes on a single CD? > > This is considered "mere aggregation" of software by the GPL, and > thus the different parts of the work do not need to have the same > license, even if there is one GPLed app there.
Sorry if this is off-topic, but I'm just checking that I understand the GPL properly. As I understand it, it is relevant that the whole application comes on a single CD, because this is what prevents you from linking a non-GPL program with a GPL library. If you distribute a CD with a GPL library, and a separate CD with a non-GPL program as a "separate work", and someone gets both CDs and links the program with the library, then the GPL has been obeyed, because: (i) the GPL library is being distributed according to the GPL; (ii) the non-GPL program doesn't contain any code from the library and is therefore not a "derivative work under copyright law"; (iii) the GPL only restricts "copying, distribution and modification"; it does not and could not restrict linking. So my impression is that the GPL is basically equivalent to the LGPL modulo (a significant amount of) inconvenience. If this is wrong, I would like to know why. If it's off-topic, is there another list I could use? Edmund