| |||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||
Can't use with GPLv2 under LGPLv3?Can't use with GPLv2 under LGPLv3?Posted Jul 10, 2007 5:18 UTC (Tue) by khim (subscriber, #9252)In reply to: Can't use with GPLv2 under LGPLv3? by tbrownaw Parent article: Samba Adopts GPLv3 for Future Releases
You are talking about this, right: "As a special exception, the source code distributed need not include anything that is normally distributed (in either source or binary form) with the major components (compiler, kernel, and so on) of the operating system on which the executable runs, unless that component itself accompanies the executable" ? You can not distribute GPLv2 program and LGPLv3 library on the same CD (exception only works if they are distributed separately - read the "special exception" carefully)...
(Log in to post comments)
Can't use with GPLv2 under LGPLv3? Posted Jul 10, 2007 13:37 UTC (Tue) by sepreece (subscriber, #19270) [Link] Actually, the exception is for things that are normally distributed *with* a major component and the "unless" is about the component itself. Examples would be a library that normally accompanies a compiler versus the compiler itself. So, you presumably could distribute a GPLv2 program with a GPLv3 version of a library that normally accompanies the compiler, so long as you didn't also include the compiler itself.
Also, the "mere aggregation" clause provides another exception, so long as the library is not "a work based on the program" and is not combined (linked) into the program to form a work based on the program.
[Also, I suppose the copyright holder for a program could ship a GPLv2 program with a GPLv3 library, because such conveying does not rely on the terms of the license. However, a downstream recipient would not have the same freedom, making the use of a free license somewhat meaningless...]
|
|
||||||||||||