I have another question about SDL that I would like clarified (sorry if this
seems obvious):
Does the source code of a game that is dynamically linked against the SDL
have to be released?
It appears that the answer is no from section 5:
5. A program that contains no derivative of any portion of the Library, but
is designed to work with the Library by being compiled or linked with it, is
called a “work that uses the Library”. Such a work, in isolation, is not a
derivative work of the Library, and therefore falls outside the scope of
this License.
I just want to make sure that I understand the licensing.
Thanks for any input
Bob
Bob Cober wrote:
I have another question about SDL that I would like clarified (sorry if this
seems obvious):
Does the source code of a game that is dynamically linked against the SDL
have to be released?
It appears that the answer is no from section 5:
5. A program that contains no derivative of any portion of the Library, but
is designed to work with the Library by being compiled or linked with it, is
called a “work that uses the Library”. Such a work, in isolation, is not a
derivative work of the Library, and therefore falls outside the scope of
this License.
I just want to make sure that I understand the licensing.
Thanks for any input
Bob
AFAIK if you link with SDL, you have to allow others to relink your
program with newer version of SDL.
For that you don’t need to release it’s source code, but only a linkable
object (such as an .obj file in Windows).
RK.
AFAIK if you link with SDL, you have to allow others to relink your
program with newer version of SDL.
For that you don’t need to release it’s source code, but only a linkable
object (such as an .obj file in Windows).
Dynamically linking to SDL (i.e. - SDL is in a shared library) fulfills
this requirement.
You don’t need to give out source or object code if you dynamically link.
–ryan.