I'm really confuesd and frustrated Please Help

[Paul Smith]

On Sat, 2020-06-27 at 15:50 +0000, JacobK622 via Gcc-help wrote:
> Anyway, I opened stdio.h in a text editor and it clearly stated that
> it was under the LGPL v2 or any later version.
> sooo... what am I missing here?

I don't understand the question.  You might find some answers and help
on the GNU license page, here: https://www.gnu.org/licenses/

> What is the email for the glibc list and would it be bad netiquette
> to post this there?

If you want to ask questions about glibc then you can certainly post on
the libc-help list.

As for where it is, Google of "glibc mailing list" returns as the very
first hit:

https://www.gnu.org/software/libc/involved.html

> "For questions about glibc's licence you should ask the glibc list or
> consult a lawyer. The first paragraph of clause 5 of LGPL v2.1 seems
> clear to me:

It may seem clear to you but legal-ese is not easy for a layperson to
read.

> 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."
> 
> The  sentence says "Such a work, in ISOLATION, is not a derivative
> work of the Library, and therefore falls outside the scope of this
> License.". If I wanted to distribute my code in source code form only
> then you would be right--the use of the libraries wouldn't affect the
> code, because they aren't combined.

I am not a lawyer so if you care to be more confident of this than
taking advice from someone on the internet, consult one.

Also I should make clear that if what you're hoping for by posting
these questions is some sort of legally binding disclaimer from the
official copyright holders, you aren't ever going to get that, either
here for the C++ library nor on the GNU libc list for that library. 
"Advice from someone on the internet" is the best you're going to do.

However, there has been 20+ years of history using the GPL and LGPL
libraries and so what's acceptable and not is well-defined (IMO).

What the LGPL means, basically, is that if you compile and link your
program against an LGPL library using its published headers then your
program is not a derivative work of that library (and hence there is no
copyright issue) AS LONG AS:

1) You link the LGPL library dynamically, not statically, OR you
provide some other means for someone to replace the LGPL library with
their own modified version (such as distributing object files that can
be relinked with a different library), AND

2) You either don't modify any of the LGPL code in order to use it, or
if you do you distribute such modifications under the LGPL as well.

There may be other requirements that may apply to LGPL libraries other
than GNU libc; see this FAQ answer for more information:
https://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl-faq.html#LGPLStaticVsDynamic
(since libc is always provided with the user's computer).


For the case of GCC there actually are some bits of code that _must_ be
statically linked with your program during linking to make it work. 
However, those bits of code are under a special license exception which
can be located from here:
https://www.gnu.org/licenses/exceptions.html


HTH!