SDL license question

Hi,

i am using SDL in my GPL program, do i need to distribute
the LGPL license with my source? what other notices
would i need to distribute?

what about if i distribute a binary program that has been
statically linked to SDL, then what would i need to
distribute with it?

Nehal

Hi Nehal !

Wed, 12 Mar 2003 11:29:33 -0800, tu as dit :

i am using SDL in my GPL program, do i need to distribute the LGPL
license with my source? what other notices would i need to
distribute?

No you don’t have to.

what about if i distribute a binary program that has been statically
linked to SDL, then what would i need to distribute with it?

No you don’t have to neither.

See :

http://www.fsf.org/licenses/lgpl.html--
Fabien Penso <@Fabien_Penso> | LinuxFr a toujours besoin de :
http://perso.LinuxFr.org/penso/ | http://linuxFr.org/dons/
A PHP Template Engine ? Take the best ! http://templeet.org/

Don’t have to what? He asked what he’d have to distribute with it.

If you mean “nothing”, you’re giving very poor advice. If you statically
link to a library licensed under the LGPL, it requires that you distribute
object files to permit people to use modified versions of the library with
your application. For specifics, see section 6. (The alternative is to
use shared linking.)On Wed, Mar 12, 2003 at 11:03:15PM +0100, Fabien Penso wrote:

what about if i distribute a binary program that has been statically
linked to SDL, then what would i need to distribute with it?

No you don’t have to neither.


Glenn Maynard

Wed, 12 Mar 2003 17:26:44 -0500, tu as dit :> On Wed, Mar 12, 2003 at 11:03:15PM +0100, Fabien Penso wrote:

what about if i distribute a binary program that has been statically
linked to SDL, then what would i need to distribute with it?

No you don’t have to neither.

Don’t have to what? He asked what he’d have to distribute with it.

If you mean “nothing”, you’re giving very poor advice. If you
statically link to a library licensed under the LGPL, it requires
that you distribute object files to permit people to use modified
versions of the library with your application. For specifics, see
section 6. (The alternative is to use shared linking.)

Sorry I misreaded the question, you are completly right.


Fabien Penso <@Fabien_Penso> | LinuxFr a toujours besoin de :
http://perso.LinuxFr.org/penso/ | http://linuxFr.org/dons/
A PHP Template Engine ? Take the best ! http://templeet.org/

Fabien Penso wrote:

Wed, 12 Mar 2003 17:26:44 -0500, tu as dit :

what about if i distribute a binary program that has been statically
linked to SDL, then what would i need to distribute with it?

No you don’t have to neither.

Don’t have to what? He asked what he’d have to distribute with it.

If you mean “nothing”, you’re giving very poor advice. If you
statically link to a library licensed under the LGPL, it requires
that you distribute object files to permit people to use modified
versions of the library with your application. For specifics, see
section 6. (The alternative is to use shared linking.)

Sorry I misreaded the question, you are completly right.

hmm, ok thx> > On Wed, Mar 12, 2003 at 11:03:15PM +0100, Fabien Penso wrote:

Well the original poster specifically asked that what he need to
distribute with he’s GPL licenced program. The answer is nothing except
he have to provide the information where to find all the used sources.
And I think the GPL licence would be nice to include as well.On Thursday 13 March 2003 00:26, Glenn Maynard wrote:

On Wed, Mar 12, 2003 at 11:03:15PM +0100, Fabien Penso wrote:

what about if i distribute a binary program that has been
statically linked to SDL, then what would i need to distribute
with it?

No you don’t have to neither.

Don’t have to what? He asked what he’d have to distribute with it.

If you mean “nothing”, you’re giving very poor advice. If you
statically link to a library licensed under the LGPL, it requires
that you distribute object files to permit people to use modified
versions of the library with your application. For specifics, see
section 6. (The alternative is to use shared linking.)

U?ytkownik Sami N??t?nen <sami.naatanen at kolumbus.fi> napisa?:

what about if i distribute a binary program that has been
statically linked to SDL, then what would i need to distribute
with it?

No you don’t have to neither.

Don’t have to what? He asked what he’d have to distribute with it.

If you mean “nothing”, you’re giving very poor advice. If you
statically link to a library licensed under the LGPL, it requires
that you distribute object files to permit people to use modified
versions of the library with your application. For specifics, see
section 6. (The alternative is to use shared linking.)

Well the original poster specifically asked that what he need to
distribute with he’s GPL licenced program. The answer is nothing except
he have to provide the information where to find all the used sources.
And I think the GPL licence would be nice to include as well.

or instead read ( with understand ) GPL licence, I agree that it is not very clearly
but it is also not so ‘mixed’ :slight_smile:
PAMASH>On Thursday 13 March 2003 00:26, Glenn Maynard wrote:

On Wed, Mar 12, 2003 at 11:03:15PM +0100, Fabien Penso wrote:


SDL mailing list
SDL at libsdl.org
http://www.libsdl.org/mailman/listinfo/sdl

If you mean “nothing”, you’re giving very poor advice. If you statically
link to a library licensed under the LGPL, it requires that you distribute
object files to permit people to use modified versions of the library with
your application. For specifics, see section 6. (The alternative is to
use shared linking.)

But the statically linked application comes with source anyway. SO someone
wanting to rebuild it with a newer version of SDL could still do this,
surely?

Nick

Well the original poster specifically asked that what he need to
distribute with he’s GPL licenced program. The answer is nothing except
he have to provide the information where to find all the used sources.
And I think the GPL licence would be nice to include as well.

SDL is LGPL, not GPL. That changes the situation completely. He doesn’t
have to provide his own source at all.

But the statically linked application comes with source anyway. SO someone
wanting to rebuild it with a newer version of SDL could still do this, surely?

The statically linked application does not necessarily come with source.
If it does, it’s all set, but the LGPL allows you to link applications
to the SDL and not provide source.

I’m not certain if you need to provide an offer of SDL’s source if you
link statically; I’d check GNU’s FAQ or send them a mail if this is in
question (my assumption would be yes). You definitely have to do so if
you’re statically linking to a modified SDL.

(I’d direct any other questions to the FSF. IANAL, after all, and I
doubt there are any lawyers on this list.)On Thu, Mar 13, 2003 at 12:20:37PM +0200, Sami N??t?nen wrote:


Glenn Maynard

He does or he can’t use GPL, like he said he would.On Thursday 13 March 2003 21:57, Glenn Maynard wrote:

On Thu, Mar 13, 2003 at 12:20:37PM +0200, Sami N??t?nen wrote:

Well the original poster specifically asked that what he need to
distribute with he’s GPL licenced program. The answer is nothing
except he have to provide the information where to find all the
used sources. And I think the GPL licence would be nice to include
as well.

SDL is LGPL, not GPL. That changes the situation completely. He
doesn’t have to provide his own source at all.