On 24/12/09 07:00, Glen Ruedinger wrote:
On Wed, Dec 23, 2009 at 3:59 PM, Luca Abeni<[email protected]> wrote:
On 23/12/09 20:32, Eugene Mymrin wrote:
I'm building an application for Android which uses FFmpeg to decode
audio streams.
Android 1.5 has a problem which makes it impossible to load
third-party library with dependencies (1.6 and newer don't have this
problem). This means I can't use libavformat library because it needs
libavutil and libavcodec. Linking with FFmpeg statically could be a
solution but I can't do that because my application is neither GPL not
LGPL.
Note that linking statically or dynamically does not change anything
regarding the licensing issues...
Another option is to create single library containing
functionality of all three libraries - avutil, avcodec, avformat. So
my question is: is it legal to build single dynamic library, name it
FFmpeg and then use it in my application?
I do not know what you mean by "legal", but this is surely not a way to
address licensing issues.
He is not trying to address licensing issue, he is trying to get around
Android not allowing more than one library while staying legal, how hard is
that?
Linking dynamically vs statically, or building one library vs multiple
libraries does not change anything from the legal point of view.
For "staying legal", one simply has to comply with the ffmpeg license
(which is the same, independently of the number of libraries and of the
linking technology).
The "simple version" is:
- If you configure ffmpeg as GPL, you have to distribute all the sources
(libraries and application)
- If you configure ffmpeg as LGPL, you have to distribute the sources of
the ffmpeg libraries and some binaries of your program which allow to
build the final application (plus makefiles and/or build scripts, if
needed).
Luca
_______________________________________________
libav-user mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.mplayerhq.hu/mailman/listinfo/libav-user
