On 15:35 21/04/04, Peter N Lewis wrote:
``Separate entity'' is rather vague; do you mean that it can run standalone, or do you mean that it does not contain code from any GPL-covered software? Both have to be true before you can consider releasing it under any license other than GPL.
I'm confused by this. If it "does not contain code from any GPL-covered software", then surely you can release it under any license you feel like, whether it can run stand-alone or not. If I
A program can be free of code from a GPL-covered program, but it links with a library licensed under the GPL, then it has to be under the GPL as well. It is this catch, if you will, that led to the LGPL.
For more information on the above, please read http://www.gnu.org/licenses/why-not-lgpl.html
write code that does not contain code from any GPL-covered software, how then could the GPL be required of my code even if it is not standalone?
If it is not standalone, and it links with one or more libraries under the GPL, then your code falls under the situation I described above. It would then have to be released under the GPL, as per its conditions.
I can't see how that could be otherwise...?
I hope my reply helps you understand the hairy situation.