From: Robert H. <Rob...@gm...> - 2014-03-07 09:28:09
|
Hi John, you are right, technically he can statically link LGPL code. But I don't know how practical it is, to provide necessary object code to let an end user re-link his application with some newer version of a LGPL'ed library. http://stackoverflow.com/questions/10130143/gpl-lgpl-and-static-linking * Proprietary Source code + LGPL Source code + statically linked: - Either you must release both parts as LGPL. - Or provide everything that allow the user to relink the application with a different version of the LGPL source code. In this case the other requirements are the same as if it was dynamically linked. + dynamically linked: - LGPL code stays LGPL, you can keep the proprietary code proprietary. Ciao Robert Am 06.03.2014, 13:03 Uhr, schrieb John Edwards <joh...@nt...>: > Hello Robert, > > Anthony seems to be under the impression that within the terms of the > LGPL licence, he cannot statically link to the LAME library. Correct me > if I'm wrong, but I didn't think any such restriction existed. > > regards > > John |