OT: Two ways Microsoft sabotages Linux desktop adoption

[Mike McCarty]

Bob Taylor wrote:
> On Tue, 2006-02-14 at 18:41 -0800, Donald Arseneau wrote:
> 
>>Mike McCarty <mike.mccarty at sbcglobal.net> writes:
>>
>>
>>>However, linking a "work that uses the Library" with the Library creates an
>>>executable that is a derivative of the Library (because it contains portions
>>>of the Library), rather than a "work that uses the library".
>>
>>This "linking" is what we'd normally refer to as "static linking",
>>where the library code is included in the executable.  Dynamic 
>>linking to a shared object library does not cause portions of the
>>library to be included in the executable.
> 
> 
> Please show us *where* in the GPL/LGPL are the words "static linking"
> and "Dynamic linking" used?  I have to agree with many others here.
> Linux/GNU, as currently licensed is dead in the water for any commercial
> development use.

I see that you are another of us who say "astounding" things, and
who constantly "trash" the [L]GPL.

The lawyers I had discussion with a few years ago said it matters
not when nor how the linking takes place, by the build computer
or by the run computer, linking is linking. And the wording does
not specify what kind of 'executable' is created. If the stuff
actually in memory executing is an 'executable', then the FSF
could argue that the terms of sections 5 and 6 of the LGPL apply.
The [L]GPL do not specify 'executable file', only 'executable'.

The exact wording is...

[QUOTE ON]

However, linking a "work that uses the Library" with the Library creates
an executable that is a derivative of the Library (because it contains
portions of the Library), rather than a "work that uses the library".
The executable is therefore covered by this License. Section 6 states
terms for distribution of such executables.

[QUOTE OFF]

One interesting thing I just noticed for the first time (or perhaps
noticed again after a few years, and didn't remember). It states that
section 6 states the terms for "distribution of such executables". So
one might argue that if one links such an executable on his own machine
by linking it at load time, but does not distribute it, then 6 has no
force, since it is not distributed.

In any case, no corporation is going to use anything which is GPL or
LGPL and risk being taken to court.

Mike
-- 
p="p=%c%s%c;main(){printf(p,34,p,34);}";main(){printf(p,34,p,34);}
This message made from 100% recycled bits.
You have found the bank of Larn.
I can explain it for you, but I can't understand it for you.
I speak only for myself, and I am unanimous in that!