Messages in this thread | | | Subject | Re: [RFC] klibc requirements | From | Doug McNaught <> | Date | 15 Jan 2002 13:36:59 -0500 |
| |
David Lang <dlang@diginsite.com> writes:
> On 15 Jan 2002, Doug McNaught wrote: > > > > > > as an example (not for the boot process, but an example of a replacement > > > libc use) I use the firewall toolkit, it has been around for a _loooong_ > > > time (in software terms anyway) and has a firly odd licence (free for you > > > to use, source available, cannot sell it) which is not compatable with the > > > GPL. with glibc staticly linked this makes huge binaries, with libc5 they > > > were a lot smaller. I would like to try to use this small libc for these > > > proxies, but if the library is GPL, not LGPL I'm not allowed to. > > > > Hmm, I think you can; you just can't redistribute it. Can you even > > redistribute fwtk on non-commercial terms? > > > nope, only allowed to get it from nai (and they sure don't make it easy to > find on their website)
Problem solved, then; you can link fwtk with a GPL'd libc on your own machines and use it all day. You can't redistribute fwtk, so you aren't even tempted to violate the GPL.
-Doug -- Let us cross over the river, and rest under the shade of the trees. --T. J. Jackson, 1863 - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| |