A newbie question for GNU toolchain
Johnson
have to be licensed under GNU?
Thanks.
Grant
>If I select GNU toolchain to compile/build my software, does my software
>have to be licensed under GNU?
Depends where the source for your application comes from. Why not
read the license?
Grant.
--
http://bugsplatter.id.au
Ivan Marsh
> If I select GNU toolchain to compile/build my software, does my software
> have to be licensed under GNU?
No. It's perfectly legal to write proprietary software with open source
software.
The obligation to license under an open source license depends on using or
(possibly) linking to currently open source code and libraries. The
specific license will tell you what is required.
--
"All right, all right, if it will make you happy, I will overthrow society."
- Philip J. Fry
Lew Pitcher
> If I select GNU toolchain to compile/build my software, does my software
> have to be licensed under GNU?
I am not a lawyer, and neither are most people who post here. You have asked
a legal question; my best advice is to ask a lawyer. However, given that I
cannot give you legal advice, here's my take on your question:
The compiler is licenced under the GPL, and the support libraries are
licenced under the LGPL.
If you include the compiler (whole, or in part) as an integral part of your
software, then you are bound by the licence for the compiler. Since the
compiler is licenced under the GPL, your code (*if* you derive your code
from the compiler, or encorporate parts of the compiler into your code)
must be GPL as well.
An example might be that your software project is an IDE with an integrated
java compiler derived from the GCC java compiler. For that project, you are
obliged to licence your software under the GPL (you are, after all, using
someone elses code; you are obliged to follow their licence).
If your software uses the support libraries, then you must provide the
support libraries under the LGPL licence. This does not affect the licence
for your software, but only the support libraries. *If* you make changes to
the support libraries, you must release those changes under the LGPL.
Other than that, you are free to choose whatever licence or licences you
want for your programs.
HTH
--
Lew Pitcher
Master Codewright & JOAT-in-training | Registered Linux User #112576
Me: http://pitcher.digitalfreehold.ca/ | Just Linux: http://justlinux.ca/
---------- Slackware - Because I know what I'm doing. ------
Johnson
Thank you all for your response. I will do some homework based on the
information.
John Hasler
> If your software uses the support libraries, then you must provide the
> support libraries under the LGPL licence. This does not affect the
> licence for your software, but only the support libraries. *If* you
> make changes to the support libraries, you must release those changes
> under the LGPL.
Note, however, that the licenses for the runtime libraries include
special exceptions. An example:
The libstdc++-v3 library is licensed under the terms of the GNU
General Public License, with this special exception:
As a special exception, you may use this file as part of a free software
library without restriction. Specifically, if other files instantiate
templates or use macros or inline functions from this file, or you compile
this file and link it with other files to produce an executable, this
file does not by itself cause the resulting executable to be covered by
the GNU General Public License. This exception does not however
invalidate any other reasons why the executable file might be covered by
the GNU General Public License.
Also note that if you dynamically link to LGPL libraries (such as libc)
you needn't concern yourself about LGPL compliance as dynamic linking
inherently complies. On the other hand, if you link to GPL libraries
(such as libreadline) you may only distribute your program under the
GPL (but you have the right to not distribute it at all).
--
John Hasler
jha...@newsguy.com
Dancing Horse Hill
Elmwood, WI USA