Isaac Dupree wrote: > It's also possible to just distribute, for > example, the .o file(s) and a way to link them with a GMP to get the > final result; this doesn't even reveal your source-code any more than > your program being dynamically linked, at least if you do it right -- right?
It doesn't matter. In a typical commercial development environment, you just don't have any control over that. At some companies I've gotten free software included in products in a way that required certain extra files from the 3rd party to be included inside our installation package - such as a source code tarball, GNU license, and such. It wasn't easy, but I've done it. But to change the way our own code is distributed - forget it. If you happen to be in a situation where the LGPL thing can be integrated as a dynamic library, fine. Otherwise, I don't see it. -Yitz _______________________________________________ Glasgow-haskell-users mailing list Glasgow-haskell-users@haskell.org http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/glasgow-haskell-users
