The license is being respected (I think?). I didn't touch it, see https://github.com/porres/pd-fluidsynth/blob/main/LICENSE.txt and, well, I do think I could make a variation of this in my ELSE library, but I'd keep the license untouched anyway. Thus, the bump in the way is still learning how to statically link a complex project like this...
So, I started a new thread to announce the test builds for mac/windows, but it all seems fine. Now, what about Linux? There's mo magical scripts for linux, why? I guess Linux handles the dependencies nicely via apt-get and stuff, but what about sharing this via deken? cheers Em qua., 6 de jan. de 2021 às 09:43, Christof Ressi <[email protected]> escreveu: > > static linking has *legal* implications: > > you cannot just distribute a binary that statically links a GPL-library > under another license (eg the dwtfyw license). > For the sake of clarity, the same is also true for dynamic linking! > > IOhannes knows this, of course, I just figured his comment could've > accidentally left some people with the impression that it's ok to > dynamically link a GPL library to a permissively (or even commerically) > licensed project. > > Now, libfluidsynth is actually LGPL v2 licensed. The LGPL has an > exception which allows to link a LGPL library to a permissively (or > commercially) licensed project. Many people seem to think that LGPL only > allows for dynamic linking, but it's also possible to link statically > under certain (more strict) conditions: > > https://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl-faq.html#LGPLStaticVsDynamic > > ***DISCLAIMER***: This is just my understanding of the situation. > Anybody feel free to correct me on this! > > Christof > > On 06.01.2021 09:52, IOhannes m zmölnig wrote: > > Am 6. Jänner 2021 03:39:00 MEZ schrieb Alexandre Torres Porres < > [email protected]>: > >> Personally, I strongly prefer static linking for plugins (like Pd > >>> externals). > >>> > >> seems best for me too! > >> > > well, apart from bloat (speaking with my system packager hat on), static > linking has *legal* implications: > > you cannot just distribute a binary that statically links a GPL-library > under another license (eg the dwtfyw license). > > > > are you prepared for doing your homework here? > > > > > > > > mfg.hft.fsl > > IOhannes > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > [email protected] mailing list > > UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management -> > https://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list > > > > _______________________________________________ > [email protected] mailing list > UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management -> > https://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list >
_______________________________________________ [email protected] mailing list UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management -> https://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list
