Thanks, I didn´t ask, but now I have more clearly understanding in that situation. It was really a bit confusing.
Bernd Am Freitag, den 18.09.2009, 23:18 +0100 schrieb Robert Pearce: > On Fri, 18 Sep 2009, BetancourtLuisMiguel > <[email protected]> wrote : > >But I have been reading that, If you use a library under the LGPL, the > >problem is in the way you distribute your software: *statically *or > >*dynamically. > > Well, that choice certainly affects how the LGPL affects you. > > >*I understand that if I use the static link (when I distribute my > >software with the library in my software package, right?) my software > >becomes LGPL and I don't want my code to be open source, I want to make > >it commercial and close-source code. > > No, that's not right. If you incorporate GPL code in your program then > you must make your program GPL, but that is explicitly not true of LGPL. > The situation is a little confusing, as the LGPL requires you to allow > the customer to use a modified version of the LGPL'd library you've > incorporated. So you would have to provide a way for the customer to > obtain from you the linkable object files needed to re-link your > application with a re-built copy of GTK. But that's not the same as > providing source code. > > >In the other hand is the dynamic linking that is, I have to distribute > >my software package without the gtkmm library. But the problem is that > >I have to say to the customer to download the gtkmm library besides my > >software. > > I don't think the LGPL actually requires you not to distribute the gtkmm > library. It does require that you admit it's gtkmm and that it's open > source and provide your customer with an easy way to get the source. But > that may only mean something as simple as including the LGPL text and > the GTKmm project URL on your installer CD. > > That said, IANAL. _______________________________________________ gtkmm-list mailing list [email protected] http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gtkmm-list
