I don't see what all the confusion is about.
Not a lawyer here, but PicoLisp 21 does **not** need to be GPL'd.
Everyone seems to confuse "linking to a GPL'd library that exists on the
host computer" VS "linking to a GPL'd library that's included with the
source code".
Please stop mixing these things.
In PicoLisp's case (pil21), libreadline is only linked to at compile
time. It is not being distributed with PicoLisp in binary or source form.
If you don't have libreadline on your system, you can't compile pil21. There is no GPL issue since the
software itself (pil21) does not **include** GPL'd software. The "linking"
clause of the license is specifically for software that is distributed with GPL'd
software linked to it (ex: in binary form, or if libreadline sources were
included with pil21 sources).
This is not the case, so please let's close this discussion, it's a
non-issue.
I know it's long, but it's worth a read:
- https://tldrlegal.com/license/gnu-general-public-license-v3-(gpl-3)
- https://choosealicense.com/licenses/gpl-3.0/
Finally, it is also possible for PicoLisp to be "dual-licensed" under GPL
and MIT, allowing the recipients to choose which license applies to them, but that
solves nothing since MIT is already compatible with GPL. People would
normally dual-license for commercial reasons, or when the license isn't
compatible with GPL.
Cheers,
AW
On Sat, 21 Nov 2020, Kevin Ednalino wrote:
I built mruby from AUR and when I do ldd there is no linking to libreadline:
linux-vdso.so.1 (0x00007ffe02708000)
libm.so.6 => /usr/lib/libm.so.6 (0x00007f6f005cb000)
libc.so.6 => /usr/lib/libc.so.6 (0x00007f6f00402000)
/lib64/ld-linux-x86-64.so.2 => /usr/lib64/ld-linux-x86-64.so.2
(0x00007f6f00804000)
Looking into the sources, the flag "MRB_USE_READLINE" seems to be only set
for the "Intel Edison" platform. It is also capable of using linenoise. So
maybe that makes it possible to be permissively licensed since it can be
proven to run without GPL (ergo it is not a derivative work).
To be pedantic, ldd picolisp:
linux-vdso.so.1 (0x00007ffe0b5bc000)
libc.so.6 => /usr/lib/libc.so.6 (0x00007fa342e6f000)
libm.so.6 => /usr/lib/libm.so.6 (0x00007fa342d29000)
libdl.so.2 => /usr/lib/libdl.so.2 (0x00007fa342d23000)
libreadline.so.8 => /usr/lib/libreadline.so.8 (0x00007fa342cd1000)
libffi.so.7 => /usr/lib/libffi.so.7 (0x00007fa342cc5000)
/lib64/ld-linux-x86-64.so.2 => /usr/lib64/ld-linux-x86-64.so.2
(0x00007fa3430d7000)
libncursesw.so.6 => /usr/lib/libncursesw.so.6 (0x00007fa342c54000)
..and picolisp can't be built/run without libreadline.
On Sat, Nov 21, 2020 at 2:26 PM Mike <tankf33...@disroot.org> wrote:
On Nov 21, 2020, at 15:30, Jeronimo Pellegrini <j...@aleph0.info> wrote:
"Mike" <tankf33...@disroot.org> writes:
Hello,
Jeronimo,
mruby is not ruby itself, but also created by Matsumoto
https://github.com/mruby/mruby
I see this is under MIT.
How it was possible ?
But is it distributed with/links to libreadline?
https://www.archlinux.org/packages/community/x86_64/mruby/
This meta info about package links readline as dependency, like pil21 do
(mike)
