John Hasler wrote: > > Yes. Terekhov is troll, deliberately trying to confuse you. Ignore him.
Indeed, I got very confused by his remarks, especially when he referred me to GPL stuff, which is *not* what I asked about. However, his last comment <You seem to forgot "provided that the terms permit" bit> sent me once again to look closely at the LGPL text and there I read: ----------- START QUOTE ------------ 6. As an exception to the Sections above, you may also combine or link a "work that uses the Library" with the Library to produce a work containing portions of the Library, and distribute that work under terms of your choice, provided that the terms permit modification of the work for the customer's own use and reverse engineering for debugging such modifications. ----------- END QUOTE ------------ Well... if I *dynamically* link to the library, is it considered "combine or link a "work that uses the Library" with the Library to produce a work containing portions of the Library" ? If so, then the 4 conditions that I listed in my last message as complying with the LGPL license are not enough: I must also provide "terms that permit modification of the work for the customer's own use and reverse engineering for debugging such modifications." Which means that I have to grant my customers access to my source code??? Thanks, Alex _______________________________________________ gnu-misc-discuss mailing list [email protected] http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnu-misc-discuss
