Re: static function ? how ?

>
> in particular, you should note that g95's runtime library
> is covered by the GPL not LGPL. Think about the consequence
> if you plan to distribute a binary version on some program.

That issue was fixed long ago.

Andy

.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: static function ? how ?
    ... >> is covered by the GPL not LGPL. ... >> if you plan to distribute a binary version on some program. ... Prev by Date: ...
    (comp.lang.fortran)
  • Re: How reliable is do a CRC on files?
    ... I'm not sure where I got my misconceptions ... >about the LGPL from. ... You were probably just thinking of GPL. ... Prev by Date: ...
    (borland.public.delphi.non-technical)
  • Re: license question?
    ... >> You can include a LGPL library in your commercial prduct, ... >> include any full GPL product in an application that is not itself full GPL ... The problem with linking in the GPL is that parts of the library are ... violation of the license. ...
    (comp.lang.java.programmer)
  • Re: license question?
    ... >> You can include a LGPL library in your commercial prduct, ... >> include any full GPL product in an application that is not itself full GPL ... The problem with linking in the GPL is that parts of the library are ... violation of the license. ...
    (comp.os.linux.misc)
  • Re: [OT] Fun with walking package licenses
    ... It is only as accurate as the license given in the ... glib2-2.6.6 LGPL ... even if it links to GPL software. ... echo "" ...
    (Fedora)