I did see in the Arduino FAQ that I would not need to give out my source=20
code, but "... The LGPL does, however, require you to make available=20
object files that allow for the relinking of the firmware against=20
updated versions of the Arduino core and libraries." and "Any=20
modifications to the core and libraries must be released under the LGPL"

The first looks like a (closed-source) commercial show-stopper.  IE: I=20
can use it, but I'd have to make my object files openly available.
The second is fine as I expect if I fix a library, I would want to give=20
that back to the community.

But I'm really interested in the Chipkit and PIC32 anyway.  That seems=20
to be under the same licenses, but I don't see that I need to make=20
object files available.  The only restrictions I could find it that it=20
must be used on Microchip products, which is perfectly fine.

Cheers,
-Neil.


On 5/29/2015 5:01 AM, William Westfield wrote:
>> What about the license
> Thorny.  Much of the library and core code uses GPL or LGPL, while saying=
 that they don=92t intend to require that your code be open-source (which i=
s contradictory, especially in embedded systems.)
>
> And each third party library can have additional license requirements.  I=
IRC, a popular SDFAT library is explicitly and intentionally viral=85  (Hmm=
..  GPL3, anyway.  I can=92t find =93explicitly viral=94 anywhere.)
>
> BillW
>
>

--=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
.