Once upon a time, =?ISO-8859-1?Q? Nils O. Sel=E5sdal?= <nos(a)utel.no> said:
On Thu, 2004-01-29 at 15:55, Chris Adams wrote:
> Along the same lines, PHP (at least the FC1 PHP RPM) also requires
> libgdbm. It also requires libfreetype (another case of the RPM saying
> GPL when it isn't). The php-snmp RPM requires libelf from elfutils
> which is GPL.
elfutils/COPYING says The Open Software License
v. 1.0
Yep, my mistake (another one where the license isn't included in the
RPM). This license appears to be similar to the GPL, with the
requirement to distribute derived works (the way I understand it
anyway). What is the difference between this and the GPL?
> I'm all for getting licenses correct, but don't throw
stones at MySQL 4
> and say it can't be linked to PHP or Apache because of GPL when parts of
> both PHP and Apache are already linked against other GPL libraries.
2 wrongs doesn't make one right..
That is definately true; I wasn't trying to say it was. I'm just saying
if GPL MySQL client libraries are a significant issue, then there are at
least a few other issues already there.
What would be the possiblity of distributing MySQL 4 but not the MySQL 4
client libraries? In other words, how hard would it be to continue to
use the LGPL MySQL 3.23 client libraries (with additional development
for protocol updates)?
--
Chris Adams <cmadams(a)hiwaay.net>
Systems and Network Administrator - HiWAAY Internet Services
I don't speak for anybody but myself - that's enough trouble.