更好地理解GPL [英] Understanding GPL better

问题描述

假设性问题 - 为了更好地理解授权。不要求法律意见。请回答您感到满意的问题的任何部分。

假设我想构建一个专有程序，即我不希望共享代码与任何人，我不希望人们免费分发我的程序给任何其他人（就像微软等）

可以说L是GPL下的一个库。 p>

1. 我可以使用像GCC这样的工具来构建我的程序吗？


2. 我可以使用类似GIT的东西作为我的代码的版本控制？


3. 我在L中调用一个函数，但不用我的源代码分发L。我要求用户获得他们自己的具有类似函数调用的软件/库。 a）允许吗？ b）我可以建议他们使用L？

现在我们假设工具A和B在LGPL下。让LGPL下有一个L库。

1. 我可以使用A来建立我的程式吗？
   
2. 我可以使用B作为版本控制对于我的代码？


3. 我希望在L中调用一个函数（不作任何修改）。 a）我必须提及我使用L吗？ b）我必须分发L吗？ c）我可以要求用户获得他们自己的具有类似函数调用的软件/库吗？ d）我可以建议他们使用L吗？

了解GPL和源代码distribution。

假设我在GPL下销售一个程序。我知道我必须确保源代码易于访问。但可以说，将源代码分发到相同的物理介质是不可能的。

1. 我可以提供免费分发源代码，但我可以收取分销费用。我的理解是正确的吗？这是什么？


2. 我认为GPL 3有一个条款，可以让我的源代码在服务器上可用。这是否适用于具有物理分布的程序或仅适用于由网络制作的程序？ 解决方案

可以说L是GPL下的一个库。

• 1：是


• 2：是


• 3 ac：
  

现在让我们假设工具A和B
是根据LGPL。让LGPL下面有一个
的L库。

<1-3>：没错，那就是LGPL是为了。

Hypothetical question - in order to understand licensing better. Not asking for legal advice. Please answer any parts of the question that you are comfortable with.

Suppose I want to build a program that is "proprietary" i.e., I do not wish to share the code with anyone and I do not wish people to distribute my program for free to any one else (just like Microsoft etc)

Lets say L is a library under GPL.

1. Can I use tools like GCC to build my program?
2. Can I use something like GIT as a version control for my code?
3. I invoke a function in L but do not distribute L with my source code. I ask users to get their own software/library that has a similar function call. a) Is that allowed? b) Can I suggest that they use L?

Now let's suppose that tools A and B are under LGPL. And let there be a library L under LGPL.

1. Can I use A to build my program?
2. Can I use B as a version control for my code?
3. I wish to invoke a function in L (without making any changes to it). a) Do I have to mention that I use L? b) Do I have to distribute L? c) Can I ask users to get their own software/library that has a similar function call. d) Can I suggest that they use L?

Understanding of GPL and source code "distribution".

Lets say that I sell a program under GPL. I know that I have to make sure that the source code is easily accessible. But lets say that distributing the source code on the same physical media is NOT possible.

1. I can offer to distribute the source code for FREE but I can charge for distribution costs. Is my understanding correct reg. this?
2. I think GPL 3 has a clause that I can make my source code available on a server. Does this apply to programs which have physical distributions or only to those made by a network?

解决方案

Lets say L is a library under GPL.

• 1: yes
• 2: yes
• 3 a-c: There are conflicting interpretations here (so it's also very unclear how this would play out in court), but the FSF's view is that you're not allowed to link against L, period. That's what the LGPL is for.

Now let's suppose that tools A and B are under LGPL. And let there be a library L under LGPL.

1-3: yes, that's fine, that's what the LGPL is for.

这篇关于更好地理解GPL的文章就介绍到这了，希望我们推荐的答案对大家有所帮助，也希望大家多多支持IT屋！