From owner-freebsd-hackers  Fri Dec  5 18:25:51 1997
Return-Path: <owner-freebsd-hackers>
Received: (from root@localhost)
          by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.7/8.8.7) id SAA06596
          for hackers-outgoing; Fri, 5 Dec 1997 18:25:51 -0800 (PST)
          (envelope-from owner-freebsd-hackers)
Received: from time.cdrom.com (root@time.cdrom.com [204.216.27.226])
          by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id SAA06590;
          Fri, 5 Dec 1997 18:25:46 -0800 (PST)
          (envelope-from jkh@time.cdrom.com)
Received: from time.cdrom.com (jkh@localhost.cdrom.com [127.0.0.1]) by time.cdrom.com (8.8.7/8.6.9) with ESMTP id SAA16680; Fri, 5 Dec 1997 18:25:39 -0800 (PST)
To: Terry Lambert <tlambert@primenet.com>
cc: hsu@FreeBSD.ORG, hackers@hub.freebsd.org
Subject: Re: shared library with static Motif? 
In-reply-to: Your message of "Fri, 05 Dec 1997 19:19:00 GMT."
             <199712051919.MAA14526@usr08.primenet.com> 
Date: Fri, 05 Dec 1997 18:25:39 -0800
Message-ID: <16677.881375139@time.cdrom.com>
From: "Jordan K. Hubbard" <jkh@time.cdrom.com>
Sender: owner-freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG
X-Loop: FreeBSD.org
Precedence: bulk

> applications to use the Licensed Program. For example, a software
> vendor who statically links routines form the "libXm" or libMrm"
> library files of the Licensed Program in object code form to run only
> within its application and with no other application has created an
> acceptable Run time Copy. 

Sure looks like the answer is "no, it's not" in this particular case
to me, which is all I was arguing.  You only support my side of the
argument with this citation.

					Jordan