> From: Ian Lance Taylor [SMTP:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
>
> So, since glibc is available as a dynamic library, most uses of glibc
> do not conflict with the LGPL. The only way to conflict would be link
> against the static version of glibc and distribute the resulting
> binary without distributing the unlinked objects.
[DJW:]
But the whole point of this thread is that the FSF
consider running ld against dynamic libraries to
create a derivative work, even though the bulk of
the library is only accessed at run time.
Moreover, if that ld step didn't create a derivative
work, the unlinked object code would represent
a "work that uses the Library", and clause 6(b) would never apply.
The existence of clause 6(b) implies that the intention was that executables
that are dynamically linked should still be subject to the first paragraph
of
section 6.
[DJW:]
--
--------------------------- DISCLAIMER ---------------------------------
Any views expressed in this message are those of the individual sender,
except where the sender specifically states them to be the views of BTS.
>
