As Weddington, Eric wrote: > You're going to have to back up your claims on this one. I have > never seen, nor heard of such a limitation.
It's also what I recall from my last reading of the LGPL (which has arguably been quite some time ago). The official reasoning for the requirement to ship relocatable object files is so that the user would be able to link against a more recent version of the LGPL'ed library. Needless to say, for a few-KiB embedded device, the requirement to ship object code to your customers would render any effort like lock bits completely useless. > FYI, the libgcc library that ships with GCC, and many times gets > linked into your AVR application, is licensed as LGPL. No, it's plain GPL but since somehow they noticed that the full emforcement of the GPL rules for a library like that one would drive many people away from using GCC, they added a special clause that waives the requirement of giving away your own source code for just linking against it. The GPL requirements only apply if you modify the libgcc code itself. So in essence, it's probably largely the same as with the CDDL. -- cheers, J"org .-.-. --... ...-- -.. . DL8DTL http://www.sax.de/~joerg/ NIC: JW11-RIPE Never trust an operating system you don't have sources for. ;-) _______________________________________________ AVR-libc-dev mailing list [email protected] http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/avr-libc-dev
