Re: Shared Libraries and naming conventions
On Sun, 30 May 1999, Daniel Quinlan wrote:
> When the issue has come up, I've been pretty firm on the point that the
> LSB sample implementation will only include LGPL or X-Consortium style
> (or another license no more restrictive than either) licenses for
> libraries.
So you're not going to include db 2.x? That will make compiling glibc
interesting at best.
> By the way, if you object to the policy of not accepting GPL libraries
> in the LSB sample implementation, now is the time to let me know.
It seems pretty unrealistic at best, unfortunately.
Erik
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
| "For the next two hours, VH1 will be filled with foul-mouthed, |
| crossdressing Australians. Viewer discretion is advised." |
| |
| Linux Application Development -- http://www.redhat.com/~johnsonm/lad |
Reply to: