[Subject Prev][Subject Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Subject Index][Thread Index]

Re: Clarification on GPL

To: linux-india-general@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: Re: Clarification on GPL
From: "Binand Raj S." <binand@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Sat, 6 Jan 2001 02:04:21 +0530
In-reply-to: <14934.7955.644576.697600@localhost.localdomain>; from raju@linux-delhi.org on Sat, Jan 06, 2001 at 12:52:59AM +0530
Mail-followup-to: linux-india-general@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
References: <Pine.LNX.4.21.0101050240300.2189-100000@kajaal.home> <3A5619AE.738D1C9E@netscape.com> <14934.7955.644576.697600@localhost.localdomain>
User-agent: Mutt/1.3.13i

Raju Mathur forced the electrons to say:
> True, though I personally am not aware of any GPL'd libraries.

John Davis' S-Lang library is under GPL and not LGPL. slrn, mutt and joe
are popular software that depend on this library (mutt can actually
use either S-Lang or curses).

S-Lang is also distributed under the perl artistic license. I don't know
what difference that makes. It sure is not under the LGPL.

Binand

Follow-Ups:
- Re: Clarification on GPL
  - From: Sudhakar Chandra

References:
- Clarification on GPL
  - From: Sandip Bhattacharya
- Re: Clarification on GPL
  - From: Sudhakar Chandra
- Re: Clarification on GPL
  - From: Raju Mathur

Prev by Subject: Re: Clarification on GPL
Next by Subject: Re: Clarification on GPL
Previous by thread: Re: Clarification on GPL
Next by thread: Re: Clarification on GPL
Index(es):
- Subject
- Thread