headers
Lionel Barret De Nazaris | 3 Dec 15:34

gmp license == no commercial/closed source haskell software ??

I've just discovered the GMP license problem. (see 
http://hackage.haskell.org/trac/ghc/wiki/ReplacingGMPNotes)

 From my understanding, the gmp is GPL, GHC statically links it on windows.
As a consequence, any program compiled using GHC must be distributed 
under a GPL compatible license.

In the threads I've read, some workarounds are proposed on linux and 
OsX, but I didn't see anything on windows.

Is the situation still the same  ?
Does anybody know a work-around to make a closed-source programm in 
haskell without violating the GPL ?

( Note this could block Haskell in our company. )

--

-- 
Best Regards,
lionel Barret de Nazaris,
=========================
Gamr7 : Cities for Games
http://www.gamr7.com
Permalink | Reply |
headers
Don Stewart | 3 Dec 15:36
Gravatar

Re: gmp license == no commercial/closed source haskell software ??

lionel:
> I've just discovered the GMP license problem. (see 
> http://hackage.haskell.org/trac/ghc/wiki/ReplacingGMPNotes)
> 
> From my understanding, the gmp is GPL, GHC statically links it on windows.
> As a consequence, any program compiled using GHC must be distributed 
> under a GPL compatible license.

GMP is *LGPL*.

> In the threads I've read, some workarounds are proposed on linux and 
> OsX, but I didn't see anything on windows.
> 
> Is the situation still the same  ?
> Does anybody know a work-around to make a closed-source programm in 
> haskell without violating the GPL ?

It is LGPL, which is a very important distinction. It just must be
possible to replace the libgmp component with another that has been
modified - you can't actively prevent people replacing the libgmp
component.

Supporting this is trivial with a dynamically linked / DLL libgmp. With
a statically linked  one, it is also possible, since the API calls to
libgmp are specified.

This shouldn't prevent commercial use -- lots of other companies have
decided this is OK. You just need to be aware of it.

-- Don
(Continue reading)

Permalink | Reply |
headers
Bulat Ziganshin | 3 Dec 17:09

Re[2]: gmp license == no commercial/closed source haskell software ??

Hello Don,

Wednesday, December 3, 2008, 5:36:57 PM, you wrote:

>> From my understanding, the gmp is GPL, GHC statically links it on windows.

> GMP is *LGPL*.

> Supporting this is trivial with a dynamically linked / DLL libgmp.

the whole problem is that it links in statically, that reduces
license to GPL

--

-- 
Best regards,
 Bulat                            mailto:Bulat.Ziganshin <at> gmail.com
Permalink | Reply |
headers
Jason Dusek | 4 Dec 07:07

Re: Re[2]: gmp license == no commercial/closed source haskell software ??

Bulat Ziganshin <bulat.ziganshin <at> gmail.com> wrote:
> Don wrote:
> > Lionel wrote:
> > > From my understanding, the gmp is GPL, GHC statically
> > > links it on windows.
> >
> > GMP is *LGPL*.
> >
> > Supporting this is trivial with a dynamically linked / DLL
> > libgmp.
>
> the whole problem is that it links in statically, that reduces
> license to GPL

  Jonathan Cast suggests earlier that there is some wiggle room
  allowed in 4/(d), even for statically linked programs:

 d) Do one of the following:

   0) Convey the Minimal Corresponding Source under the terms of
      this License, and the Corresponding Application Code in a
      form suitable for, and under terms that permit, the user
      to recombine or relink the Application with a modified
      version of the Linked Version to produce a modified
      Combined Work, in the manner specified by section 6 of the
      GNU GPL for conveying Corresponding Source.

   1) Use a suitable shared library mechanism for linking with
      the Library. A suitable mechanism is one that (a) uses at
      run time a copy of the Library already present on the
(Continue reading)

Permalink | Reply |
headers
Alex Sandro Queiroz e Silva | 3 Dec 16:40

Re: gmp license == no commercial/closed source haskell software ??

Hallo,

Don Stewart wrote:
> 
> Supporting this is trivial with a dynamically linked / DLL libgmp. With
> a statically linked  one, it is also possible, since the API calls to
> libgmp are specified.
>

     Is it also possible? How?

> This shouldn't prevent commercial use -- lots of other companies have
> decided this is OK. You just need to be aware of it.
> 

     They have decided this is OK as long as they can ship a shared library.

Cheers,
-alex
http://www.ventonegro.org/
Permalink | Reply |
headers
Jonathan Cast | 3 Dec 15:45
Favicon

Re: gmp license == no commercial/closed source haskell software ??

On Wed, 2008-12-03 at 15:36 +0100, Lionel Barret De Nazaris wrote:
> I've just discovered the GMP license problem. (see 
> http://hackage.haskell.org/trac/ghc/wiki/ReplacingGMPNotes)
> 
>  From my understanding, the gmp is GPL, GHC statically links it on
> windows.

Lesser GPL: http://www.gnu.org/copyleft/lesser.html

It doesn't actually have a section 2(c) as per the wiki.  Section 4(d)0
of the LGPL is traditionally taken to allow static linking, as long as
you distribute

a) The source of the version of GMP you use (corresponding source), and
b) Object files/libraries for your program + the GHC RTS suitable for
static linking with your user's (possibly modified) builds of the
distributed GMP source.

jcc
Permalink | Reply |

Gmane