> I would say it's kinda unclear what the implications are for LGPL'd
headers in this context
It's unclear to me too, and I've read the LGPL2.1 top to bottom like five
times ("The threshold for this to be true is not precisely defined by law."
doesn't exactly inspire confidence). The stipulations in section 6 seem
significant to me, and appear to me to go beyond redistributing the headers:
> ... you must do one of these things:
>
> a) Accompany the work with the complete corresponding machine-readable
source
> code for the Library ... if the work is an executable linked with the
Library, with the
> complete machine-readable "work that uses the Library", as object code
and/or
> source code ...
>
> b) Use a suitable shared library mechanism for linking with the Library.
... will operate
> properly with a modified version of the library ...
>
> For an executable, the required form of the "work that uses the Library"
must include
> any data and utility programs needed for reproducing the executable from
it ...
https://www.gnu.org/licenses/old-licenses/lgpl-2.1.en.html
rpcsal.h doesn't really do anything, but it *is* transitively included by
at least six hundred other headers, so I imagine there are a lot of users
that have used it and not noticed and taken stock of the obligations it may
impose on them.
> Are you aware of llvm-mingw, https://github.com/mstorsjo/llvm-mingw?
Yep! Great work, thank you for making that. I had a specific goal in mind
that led me to a moderately different result.
--
Dustin Gadal
_______________________________________________
Mingw-w64-public mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/mingw-w64-public
