Posted by: Anonymous Coward
on April 05, 2007 04:38 AM
That's an attempt to put language to the concept of binary linkage -- the idea is that (as per GPL history) if you link against a non-System library that is covered by the GPL (the classic example being libreadline), you are bound by that library's license, as your program "specifically was designed to require that library".
The problem with defining the term is a technological one -- when doing static linking, it's clear that libreadline is now part of your application, and is distributed with it. But when you're using a dynamic loader, it's not "part" of the application -- however, the FSF feels that it should be treated as if it *is* being distributed with your application, and the consequences that that entails.
Learn about Linux
Download Linux
Get Linux help
Re:The language of draft 3 is still very vague
Posted by: Anonymous Coward on April 05, 2007 04:38 AMThe problem with defining the term is a technological one -- when doing static linking, it's clear that libreadline is now part of your application, and is distributed with it. But when you're using a dynamic loader, it's not "part" of the application -- however, the FSF feels that it should be treated as if it *is* being distributed with your application, and the consequences that that entails.
#