On Wed, 2 Apr 2003, Lamar Owen wrote:
> On Wednesday 02 April 2003 18:11, Dann Corbit wrote:
> [snip]
> > > True. But not linking to LGPLd libs would be a bit extreme there.
>
> > I disagree. Because of the language in the LGPL:
> > http://www.gnu.org/copyleft/lesser.txt
> >
> > I would not use LGPL tools in any finished commercial project. For me,
> > if PostgreSQL linked against LGPL libraries, it would kill its
> > usefulness for me completely.
>
> > "However, linking a "work that uses the Library" with the Library
> > creates an executable that is a derivative of the Library (because it
> > contains portions of the Library), rather than a "work that uses the
> > library". The executable is therefore covered by this License.
> > Section 6 states terms for distribution of such executables."
>
> <stifles ROTFL>
>
> Everyone does realize that on Linux PostgreSQL binaries link against glibc,
> which is LGPL......
I assume the standard dynamic linker counts as "a suitable shared library
mechanism for linking with the Library" as per LGPL 6b. ;)
