> That's close to the mark. However there are two important caveats:
>
> 1) Your codebase must provide a mechanism for relinking with newer versions
> of the library. With applications software this usually isn't a big deal
> because the library is dynamically linked anyway. However in an embedded
> environment, this could in fact be problematic.

You are right. I reread things and the LGPL isn't what I want. However,
it isn't that critical to me because I'm releasing Java code.

> 2) Those rules do not apply to the library itself. If you modify and
> redistribute the actual LGPL code, it behaves the same as GPL code i.e.
> you have to release the source to any changes to the library.

On the other hand, this *is* something I want.

> > I will reread the relevent files when I'm awake, as it's after 2:30 am
> > here.  :)
>
> You see the caveats when you do.

Ayup. You're right.
--
D. Jay Newman           !
jay@sprucegrove.com     ! Xander: Giles, don't make cave-slayer unhappy.
http://enerd.ws/robots/ !

--
http://www.piclist.com#nomail Going offline? Don't AutoReply us!
email listserv@mitvma.mit.edu with SET PICList DIGEST in the body