[vorbis] Vorbis licensing...

[Michael Smith]

At 04:59 PM 10/26/00 -0700, you wrote:
>> I believe jack is confused.  Example in point: libgcc.a is LGPL and
>> may be linked to closed apps. GNU libc is in the same boat.
>> 
>> Can any GNU scholars refute my statement?
>
>I believe if you do that you have to include all the .o files so that
>hte app may be relinked.

Yes. However, it is considered sufficient that you supply an offer for the
object files, in just the same way that you need not actually supply the
source, you need only supply an offer for the source.

>The issues is that the user hsould be able to change the source,
>recompile, and have it work with the application.

Yeah. It's intended to allow the user to replace the version of the library
in use, in the same way that dynamic linking does. As long as the user can,
through some possibly convoluted process, end up with an executable which
uses the new version, things are ok. This often means that using a shared
library is easier. 

Michael

--- >8 ----
List archives:  http://www.xiph.org/archives/
Ogg project homepage: http://www.xiph.org/ogg/
To unsubscribe from this list, send a message to 'vorbis-request at xiph.org'
containing only the word 'unsubscribe' in the body.  No subject is needed.
Unsubscribe messages sent to the list will be ignored/filtered.