On Jul 26, 2007, at 8:54 AM, Simon Marlow wrote:
Duncan Coutts wrote:
On Thu, 2007-07-26 at 08:53 +0100, Simon Marlow wrote:
The library route would be preferable, unless it causes any
licensing headaches.
LGPL'ed Haskell code can't be so easily relinked as C code (stable
ABI
and all that) then we might be able to ask for a static linking
exception for cpphs.
There are no real practical problems with this, as you say we
already link to LGPL libraries. But as a matter of strategy, we
want to reduce our (L)GPL dependencies.
To my knowledge it would not be a problem to distribute cpphs as a
separate program; I could always hold off using cpphs as a library
until we get shared libraries working. Cpphs itself uses the
HuttonMeijerWallace parser combinator library which at one time was
included in the extra libs (but isn't now, sadly enough--it has a
space-efficient lazy extension) but that is LGPL as well.
Cheers,
Pete
_______________________________________________
Cvs-ghc mailing list
[email protected]
http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/cvs-ghc
