[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]

Re: OT: Two ways Microsoft sabotages Linux desktop adoption



On Thu, 2006-02-16 at 00:41 -0600, Les Mikesell wrote:
> On Thu, 2006-02-16 at 00:31, Ralf Corsepius wrote:
> 
> > > > In any case, no corporation is going to use anything which is GPL or
> > > > LGPL and risk being taken to court.
> > > 
> > > They do use it, they just can't distribute it - not even if they
> > > want to give it away.  Which means that the rest of us won't
> > > ever have it.
> > Wrong. You can dynamically link against LGPL'ed libraries and many
> > closed source packages, comprising $$$ ones, do.
> 
> Yes, but RMS would prefer that the LGPL did not exist.

Yes, this is his opinion. It's a political statement of his, you can
agree with or not.

> > Tiny, but popular example: RealPlayer (RealPlayer10GOLD.rpm)
> > 
> > ldd usr/local/RealPlayer/realplay.bin
> >         linux-gate.so.1 =>  (0x00869000)
> >         libstdc++.so.5 => /usr/lib/libstdc++.so.5 (0x00e97000)
> 
> You'll note there's nothing like, say, libreadline in
> there.

Exactly, because it's GPL'ed. LGPL and GPL are different things.
Though they are similar, they are substantially different.

Ralf



[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]