Hi, Brett Viren wrote:
>How are LGPLed C++ libs considered problematic? Can you provide a >link to where you read this? > > Especially this one: http://gcc.gnu.org/onlinedocs/libstdc++/17_intro/license.html and some earlier post on this list which I read some time ago in an archive. If the LGPL is problematic for the libstdc++ folks it probably is really problematic. I'm no lawyer though (unfortunately in this case). >Maybe this has something to do with LGPLed template headers compiled >in to non-LGPLed main programs? > > "The LGPL requires that users be able to replace the LGPL code with a modified version" (the problem named by the libstdc++ authors) - again, I'm no lawyer to interpret this. >-Brett. > > Aristid (probably hard to pronounce ;-) _______________________________________________ libsigc-list mailing list libsigc-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/libsigc-list
