[PD] linking libs with pd-lib-builder (was Re: fluid~)

Christof Ressi info at christofressi.com
Wed Jan 6 13:40:54 CET 2021


> static linking has *legal* implications:
> you cannot just distribute a binary that statically links a GPL-library under another license (eg the dwtfyw license).
For the sake of clarity, the same is also true for dynamic linking!

IOhannes knows this, of course, I just figured his comment could've 
accidentally left some people with the impression that it's ok to 
dynamically link a GPL library to a permissively (or even commerically) 
licensed project.

Now, libfluidsynth is actually LGPL v2 licensed. The LGPL has an 
exception which allows to link a LGPL library to a permissively (or 
commercially) licensed project. Many people seem to think that LGPL only 
allows for dynamic linking, but it's also possible to link statically 
under certain (more strict) conditions:

https://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl-faq.html#LGPLStaticVsDynamic

***DISCLAIMER***: This is just my understanding of the situation. 
Anybody feel free to correct me on this!

Christof

On 06.01.2021 09:52, IOhannes m zmölnig wrote:
> Am 6. Jänner 2021 03:39:00 MEZ schrieb Alexandre Torres Porres <porres at gmail.com>:
>> Personally, I strongly prefer static linking for plugins (like Pd
>>> externals).
>>>
>> seems best for me too!
>>
> well, apart from bloat (speaking with my system packager hat on), static linking has *legal* implications:
> you cannot just distribute a binary that statically links a GPL-library under another license (eg the dwtfyw license).
>
> are you prepared for doing your homework here?
>
>
>
> mfg.hft.fsl
> IOhannes
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Pd-list at lists.iem.at mailing list
> UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management -> https://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list





More information about the Pd-list mailing list