Bulat Ziganshin wrote: >> for me, GMP is much more problematic issue. strictly speaking, we >> can't say that GHC is BSD-licensed because it includes LGPL-licensed >> code (and that much worse, it includes this code in run-time libs)
Manuel M T Chakravarty wrote: > ..binary distributions of GHC that include libgmp.a and statically > link it into compiled code... All > that is needed to make this legal is to (a)... > (b) give users access to another version of > the proprietary program that links GMP dynamically. Wow, I didn't realize that. Now I understand Bulat. In a project of any serious size and complexity, the use of static or dynamic linking is often architechted in and cannot be changed. So LGPL is really bad for a general purpose compiler like GHC. We've got to make GMP optional, or get rid of it. -Yitz _______________________________________________ Glasgow-haskell-users mailing list Glasgow-haskell-users@haskell.org http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/glasgow-haskell-users
