Re: Porting Lua to Windows Mobile Professional 6.5.3

[Rob Kendrick <rjek@...>]

On Thu, Jun 02, 2011 at 09:48:25AM -0400, Thomas Harning Jr. wrote:
> On Thu, Jun 2, 2011 at 9:40 AM, Reuben Thomas <rrt@sc3d.org> wrote:
> > On 2 June 2011 10:07, Marc Balmer <marc@msys.ch> wrote:
> >>
> >> LGPL is not acceptable due to the condition that an end user must be
> >> able to link against newer versions of a library.
> >
> > That's a new one on me! Reference? I can't find anything about a
> > problem like this...
>
> That is the premise of LGPL, you cannot statically link to it for the
> fact that a user cannot pull in new versions of their own altered
> version of the given LGPL library.

You can static link, as long as you also ship all the object files so
the user can re-static link.

Of course, the licence doesn't say anything about ABI or API changes,
and so it's essentially impossible to abide by the licence as it's
possible that a newer version of the library won't link to it.

B.