Jeroen Dekkers <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > On Wed, Apr 10, 2002 at 09:27:41PM +0100, Bruce Stephens wrote:
[...] >> It matters in that valgrind's not a useful source of code to steal >> (unless some agreement could be reached with the author, of course, >> which might well be possible) since it's GNU GPL. > > You can link GPL and LGPL code without any problem. But I've to look > at the GNU GPL better to see if it is possible to link GPL'd code > with plex86 if it is running on a host OS with a GPL incompatible > license. I don't see why this should be a problem (there's no problem running Emacs on Microsoft Windows, for example). My point was solely that if plex86 were to want to use code from valgrind (specifically the code that relatively efficiently emulates x86 code), then the result would be covered by the GNU GPL (unless the author of valgrind could be persuaded to offer the code under the Lesser license). So if plex86 is to remain under the LGPL, then looking at valgrind code wouldn't be useful. (Of course, as I understand it, plex86 isn't supposed to do interpreting much---that's what bochs is for---plex86 is supposed to be executing code directly as much as possible, in much the same way that VMWare does. I suspect, though, valgrind's operation is quite similar to what plex86 will have to do, and so there'd be a useful overlap.)
