On Wednesday 02 April 2003 22:39, Tom Lane wrote:
> Lamar Owen <lamar.owen@wgcr.org> writes:
> > <stifles ROTFL>
> > Everyone does realize that on Linux PostgreSQL binaries link against
> > glibc, which is LGPL......
> And your point is?
That everyone is being entirely too picky. Hey, we link against other things,
too. Some aren't LGPL. The readline example is a good one, incidentally:
it's GPL. And its stubs are in the backend, of all places. At least on
Linux.
Gotta watch any 'static builds' then.
> On other Unixoid systems you can link against BSD-license libc code, or
> some-random-proprietary-license code from HP or Sun or whomever. glibc
> doesn't have a monopoly in that sphere. But mlw is offering code that
> will *only* run against a single implementation that is LGPL licensed.
> That makes it effectively LGPL.
One could clean-room reimplement if the demand is enough.
But, if one wants to get picky, let's talk about the license issue of
PL/Python. The PSF looks like a rat's nest.
--
Lamar Owen
WGCR Internet Radio
1 Peter 4:11
