Re: kde-xemacs or gnome-xemacs?
Glynn Clements <glynn(a)sensei.co.uk> writes:
Justin Vallon wrote:
> The point is whether an xemacs binary linked against Qt (dynamically)
> can be (legally) distributed to the end-user, or whether that end-user
> needs to compile xemacs from source to be allowed to use Qt.
Which seems to hinge on whether a binary is considered a derivative
work of any header files which are used in its compilation. The answer
to this doesn't seem (to me) to be particularly clear.
Commercially:
This would be the case [with respect to any reasonably sane license].
If I get a developer's license, I can build and distribute the program
against licensed code. Some dev licenses are 'run-time' licenses that
allow me to redistribute libraries. Others require that each end-user
purchase their library/code.
The situation where you could not redistribute such dynamically linked
code would be absurd, because it would effectively prohibit you from
distributing object code in any form.
GPL:
Maybe it isn't a sane license.
--
-Justin
vallon(a)mindspring.com