Version française
Home     About     Download     Resources     Contact us    

This site is updated infrequently. For up-to-date information, please visit the new OCaml website at

Browse thread
copyright of byte code containing the run time system
[ Home ] [ Index: by date | by threads ]
[ Search: ]

[ Message by date: previous | next ] [ Message in thread: previous | next ] [ Thread: previous | next ]
Date: 2000-09-28 (14:57)
From: Sven LUTHER <luther@d...>
Subject: Re: copyright of byte code containing the run time system
On Tue, Sep 26, 2000 at 11:28:14AM +0200, Xavier Leroy wrote:
> > Please forgive me if this has already has been discussed. I am confused
> > by the new LGPL/Q license of ocaml. The ocaml source distribution 
> > details the copyright of the different source files, however, I have some
> > doubts about the implications for the compiled tools. Here is my
> > problem:
> > 
> > I'm building a binary distribution of a program which is itself GPL
> > licensed. There are three different ways to build an "executable":
> > 
> > 1.) compiled to native code
> > 2.) compiled to byte code, packaged without the runtime system
> >     (in this case, the user would have to install an ocaml package
> >      which comes with it own license).
> > 3.) compiled to byte code and with the runtime system (compiled with -custom)
> Our intent is that you should be able to link with the OCaml libraries
> and runtime system, and distribute the resulting executable without
> any restrictions.  We chose the LGPL for these part of the systems
> precisely to allow this.
> Now, there is some fine print in the LGPL that makes a subtle
> distinction between static linking and dynamic linking, which we did
> not understand at first (and we now find this distinction silly and useless).

Xavier, ...

why not clarify further this further and simply state in your licence that the
runtime is under the LGPL, with the added permission to distribute statically
linked code. I don't have it under my eyes right now, but i think you
understand the idea.

> But even with the most pessimistic reading of the LGPL, there cannot
> be any problems if your main program is itself under a free license
> such as the GPL or LGPL.

Anyway, the only problem that could arise would be if INRIA (or whoever hold
the copyright for the runtime) decide to begin suing people about it. I don't
think this will happen.

Also, what about the toplevel ?

I guess a program built with ocamlmktop would be under the QPL, since it
contains not only the runtime, but also some part of the compiler needed for
parsing ocaml sentences ?

But then i may be wron, didn't look at the files involved.