Message-Id:	<m0xgUHa-000S25C@inti.gov.ar>
Comments:	Authenticated sender is <salvador AT natacha DOT inti DOT gov DOT ar>
From:	"Salvador Eduardo Tropea (SET)" <salvador AT inti DOT edu DOT ar>
Organization:	INTI
To:	Geza Herman <geza AT inf DOT bme DOT hu>, djgpp AT delorie DOT com
Date:	Fri, 12 Dec 1997 15:39:17 +0000
MIME-Version:	1.0
Subject:	Re: Source code
In-reply-to:	<Pine.GSO.3.95.971212143920.26807A-100000@kempelen.inf.bme.hu>

Geza Herman <geza AT inf DOT bme DOT hu> wrote:
> 	
> 	I don't have a programming question but a (L)GPL question.
> 	If I write a program, and I only use libraries and GCC,
> 	should I sell the binaries with *source* code?
> 
> 				Geza
> 
> PS: I wrote this message to gnu.misc.discuss, but nobody could answer me
>     exactly. And please, use CC to my email address.

If you use the *binary* GCC (I mean: you don't use parts of the source of GCC 
;-) and the djgpp's libc.a library you can make anything you want with the 
generated EXE file. If you are using C++ you must be careful because there are 
2 libraries, one from djgpp (can be used without restrictions) and one from 
GNU. The one from GNU is LGPL code, that means: if you use it your code becomes 
GPL.
The djgpp goal is to avoid generating GPL programs.
The only thing that I think isn't clear at all is that under Linux all is 
linked with the GNU libc and hence is GPL, but nobody takes it in count. As an 
example Sharewar's DOOM was freelly distributed (without sources) under Linux 
and nobody put a complain. Does anybody understand it? Is just an example there 
are tons more.

SET
------------------------------------ 0 --------------------------------
Visit my home page: http://www.geocities.com/SiliconValley/Vista/6552/
Salvador Eduardo Tropea (SET). (Electronics Engineer)
Alternative e-mail: set-sot AT usa DOT net - ICQ: 2951574
Address: Curapaligue 2124, Caseros, 3 de Febrero
Buenos Aires, (1678), ARGENTINA
TE: +(541) 759 0013

- Raw text -