David Brown wrote:
Just out of curiosity (I'm not trying to find ways around the (L)GPL), do
you need to provide any sort of information (like details of the tools used
and compiler flags) or additional files (like linker files) with the object
files and (possibly modified) LGPL'ed library? It would be easy to arrange
for the code to be linkable but unrunable if a specific linker control file
(or options for the linker command-line) were not included - perhaps
locating a particular symbol at a specific address, which is checked by
start-up code. Or the code might require post-processing, such as the
generation of a checksum which is stored at a specific address, and checked
on start-up.
The LGPL says:
>> "Source code" for a work means the preferred form of the work for
making modifications to it. For a library, complete source code means
all the source code for all modules it contains, plus any associated
interface definition files, plus the scripts used to control
compilation and installation of the library. <<
I guess linker scripts would probably come under 'interface definition
files'. And a post-processing program which adds a checksum would come
under 'the scripts used to control compilation and installation of the
library.'
That would be the Mozilla Public License? That might well be a good
solution - as far as I can see, it lies between the GPL and BSD - if you
modify any MPL'ed files, or include MPL'ed code in one of your files, then
that file must be MPL'ed, but it does not affect any other files included in
the same program. Is that right?
Yes, that's right.
--
------------ Alex Holden - http://www.linuxhacker.org ------------
If it doesn't work, you're not hitting it with a big enough hammer
