|
FAST Protocol
< Previous Next >
Re: FAST C++ open-source contribution
Rolf Andersson / Pantor Engineering
24 Mar 2008 2:37AM ET Konstantin,
AFAICT Q&A #2 says "... rendering the LGPL equivalent to the GPL"
in the case of a C++ library with inline functions and templates.
Q: How is that different from the GNU {Lesser,Library} GPL?
A: The LGPL requires that users be able to replace the LGPL code
with a modified version; this is trivial if the library in
question is a C shared library. But there's no way to make that
work with C++, where much of the library consists of inline
functions and templates, which are expanded inside the code that
uses the library. So to allow people to replace the library code,
someone using the library would have to distribute their own
source, rendering the LGPL equivalent to the GPL.
Am I missing something here?
/Rolf
> libstdc++ is licensed under the terms of GPLv2 license with
> "runtime exception" that is explained in FAQ form:
> Q: So any program which uses libstdc++ falls under the GPL?
> R: No. The special exception permits use of the library in
> proprietary applications.
>
> But we are talking about LGPL license:
> http://www.gnu.org/licenses/lgpl.html
>
> The main difference between GPL and LGPL that LGPL-ed library
> can be used by non-(L)GPL program. This program can be
> distributed under any chosen license.
>
> Wikipedia provides a good introduction to LGPL:
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GNU_Lesser_General_Public_License
>
> -Konstantin
>
>> I got some feedback off-line and it seems that LGPL and C++
>> libs may be problematic. I suggest you check:
>>
>> http://gcc.gnu.org/onlinedocs/libstdc++/17_intro/license.html
>>
>> Best, Rolf
>>
Re: FAST C++ open-source contribution
Rolf Andersson / Pantor Engineering 24 Mar 2008 2:37AM ET
|
