On Mon, Aug 25, 2014 at 10:44:09PM +0100, David wrote:
> On 25/08/2014 20:43, John J. McDonough wrote:
> > If you use an open source compiler under the GPL, then there is no
> > question that you can do what you want with the result, and ditto for
> > those libraries licensed under GPL.
>=20
> You cannot "do what you want with the result", as the GPL (and other
> similar licenses) place requirements on you if your final product
> includes GNU GPL libraries.

This is correct. However, as pointed out below it's not as challenging as
it may seem.

>=20
> >From http://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl-faq.html#IfLibraryIsGPL :
>=20
> "If a library is released under the GPL (not the LGPL), does that mean
> that any software which uses it has to be under the GPL or a
> GPL-compatible license?
>=20
> Yes, because the software as it is actually run includes the library."
>=20
> >From http://www.gnu.org/licenses/why-not-lgpl.html :
>=20
> "using the ordinary GPL for a library makes it available only for free
> programs"
>=20
> A popular example of this is home routers that use Linux as a base
> operating system and bundle GPL binaries/libraries.
>=20
> Therefore if *all* required libraries for compiling a program were GNU
> GPL, e.g.
>=20
>  - the C runtime
>  - startup/initialisation code
>  - popular functions like printf() or malloc()
>=20
> .. then you would not be free to "do what you want".  For this reason
> the GNU C library (glibc) is LGPL and avr-libc is a modified BSD license.

And this is generally why the proposition fails. Even with GPL (not LGPL)
libraries, an exception is generally made for linking only.

It makes sense when you view the underlaying objective. The GPL tries to
balance the freedom of you using the codebase for what you want to do
against the free of others having the ability to benefit from improvements.
I've always thought of it as "Granting access to the source, and all
successive forks of that source too." I reiterate that only applies to the
GPL code, not your code.

Unfortunately many would take advantage of forking a codebase they did not
develop and not sharing the changes of the fork for a competive advantage.
The GPL in all of it forms is designed to give open access to the codebase
while allowing individual developers to develop their own work unimpeaded.

That's why even though in theory it would be possible to create a system
that embeds GPL code in such a way that someone's independent code would
have to be open sourced, it doesn't happen because it's totally against the
spirit of the effort.

BAJ

>=20
> David
> --=20
> http://www.piclist.com/techref/piclist PIC/SX FAQ & list archive
> View/change your membership options at
> http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/piclist

--=20
Byron A. Jeff
Chair: Department of Computer Science and Information Technology
College of Information and Mathematical Sciences
Clayton State University
http://faculty.clayton.edu/bjeff
--=20
http://www.piclist.com/techref/piclist PIC/SX FAQ & list archive
View/change your membership options at
http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/piclist
.