This is the mail archive of the gcc-help@gcc.gnu.org mailing list for the GCC project.


Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]
Other format: [Raw text]

Re: static libgcc license?


Eljay Love-Jensen wrote:
My understanding is that libgcc.a is LGPL, and thus does not GPL "infect" (obligate) your code.

Hi! Thanks for the response.


Unfortunately, considering that libgcc.a is a static library and
we're wishing to link it statically, the distinction between
the LGPL and GPL is (I believe) irrelevant.

Indeed, if libgcc is raw LGPL without the exemptions, then
static libgcc linkage would quite clearly render our application
license-infected.

The question I was (perhaps unclearly) asking was whether libgcc
is licensed appropriately to allow static linking within any-
licensed binaries, whether libgcc be X11/BSD-style licensed,
[L]GPL-with-exemptions, or similar.

Regards,
--Adam
--
Adam D. Moss   . ,,^^   adam@gimp.org   http://www.foxbox.org/   co:3
"Tell people something they know already and they will thank you for
it.i  Tell them something new and they will hate you for it."


Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]