Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Fri, 05 Dec 1997 21:53:52 -0800
From:      "Jordan K. Hubbard" <jkh@time.cdrom.com>
To:        Mike Smith <mike@smith.net.au>
Cc:        Terry Lambert <tlambert@primenet.com>, hsu@FreeBSD.ORG (Jeffrey Hsu), hackers@hub.freebsd.org
Subject:   Re: shared library with static Motif? 
Message-ID:  <17481.881387632@time.cdrom.com>
In-Reply-To: Your message of "Sat, 06 Dec 1997 12:57:20 %2B1030." <199712060227.MAA00955@word.smith.net.au> 

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> That's odd; StarOffice has most of the Motif library buried inside 
> their GUI library.  I think they deconstructed the original shared 
> libraries and re-archived them along with the rest of their stuff.

You don't have to do this - all you need to do is statically link in
Motif while leaving everything else shared - that's what the -Bstatic
and -Bdynamic flags for ld toggle on and off, and if you embed them
strategically in your link line you can make this happen.

I think what Terry's confused about is the part of the license which
essentially attempts to disallow anyone from including the shared
libraries and/or headers in a form which allow completely different
applications to link against and use them.

I also have a slight advantage in this debate, having talked just a
couple of weeks ago to the Open Group managers who are in charge of
the Motif licensing issues, and they assured me that static linking,
as long as it wasn't for the express purpose of somehow "wrapping" the
development libraries in a way that could still be directly exploited
by another C/C++ programmer, is quite fine.  I then asked them about
"moat", the Motif interface for TCL which allows one to do precisely
that in a TCL interpreter but is shippied static.  They said that this
was fine too, and that they were in the process of making Motif's
license a fair bit easier to swallow from the whole static/dynamic
linking perspective (they weren't precise, but I got the feeling that
they may be focusing strictly on the header files in any future
"compliance enforcement" issues).

				Jordan



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?17481.881387632>