On 17 Sep 2004, skaller wrote:

> LGPL isn't fine if you statically link OR #include
> any GTK headers. That makes your binary a derived
> work. It says so in the LGPL licence. So your
> *source* may not be LGPL, but the resultant 
> program is.

Are you a lawyer?

If the answer is "no", it's customary to put IANAL in front of rants like 
this.  

If the answer is "yes", please tell me what state bar or bars you have 
passed, and give me the relevent case law.

Or simply shut the fuck up.  Even I'm getting tired of the off-topic, 
anti-GPL rants.

-- 
"Usenet is like a herd of performing elephants with diarrhea -- massive,
difficult to redirect, awe-inspiring, entertaining, and a source of
mind-boggling amounts of excrement when you least expect it."
                                - Gene Spafford 
Brian

-------------------
To unsubscribe, mail caml-list-request@inria.fr Archives: http://caml.inria.fr
Bug reports: http://caml.inria.fr/bin/caml-bugs FAQ: http://caml.inria.fr/FAQ/
Beginner's list: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/ocaml_beginners