[omniORB] omniORB licensing: Too strict for real life?

[Gary D. Duzan]

   Yes, I know of one project (Demeter/C++ for Linux) which did this.
They shipped a .o file for the application and then had the
installation script do the linking with the LGPLed libraries. An
interesting solution, and presumably compliant with the license since
you can simply replace the library and run the install script again.

					Gary Duzan
					GTE Laboratories



In Message <Pine.LNX.4.04.9905260930390.27577-100000@pitanga> ,
   David Riddoch <djr@uk.research.att.com> wrote:

=>
=>On Tue, 25 May 1999, Helge Penne wrote:
=>
=>> One potential problem remains, however: The OS might force us to link statically
=>> with omniORB, as the support for dynamic link libraries is somewhat limited.  Can
=>> we still distribute the application without providing application source code or
=>> complete object files, or will we run into license confilcts in this area too?
=>
=>Helge,
=>
=>The situation is that your customer must be able to relink a modified
=>version of omniORB.  I understand that your problem is that you cannot
=>distribute other third-party libraries which are part of your system.  All
=>I can suggest is that you find some way to re-package these libraries and
=>your object code in a way that makes everyone happy.
=>
=>Would it be possible to link these libraries with the object code of your
=>application into a new library?  Then to relink, your customer just has to
=>link this library and the omniORB library (probably with a dummy object
=>file which ought to reference main).  I have no idea how to do this -- but
=>I think it ought to be possible!
=>
=>David
=>
=>
=>