> The original name of the LGPL was the Library Lesser General Public > License. It's about equivalent to the copyleft of the MPL, where > modifications and new code internally are copyleft, but there is no > linking clause. But the thing is, the GPL doesn't say that you can > only link to GPL code. It says you can only link to GPL __compatible__ > code. LGPL is a GPL-compatible license (otherwise, how would the FSF > have even used it, before they started officially endorsing GPL with > the classpath exception for this. I'm pretty sure that they did that > because the GPL w/ classpath exception is closer to the things they > want to do, but still does the job of allowing non-GPL linking.
But when I link to LGPL which wraps GPL - am I then linking GPL? ------------------------------------------------------------------------- This SF.net email is sponsored by: Splunk Inc. Still grepping through log files to find problems? Stop. Now Search log events and configuration files using AJAX and a browser. Download your FREE copy of Splunk now >> http://get.splunk.com/ _______________________________________________ SharpOS-Developers mailing list SharpOS-Developers@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/sharpos-developers
