From owner-freebsd-hackers Fri Dec 5 21:54:05 1997 Return-Path: Received: (from root@localhost) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.7/8.8.7) id VAA20790 for hackers-outgoing; Fri, 5 Dec 1997 21:54:05 -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 VAA20782; Fri, 5 Dec 1997 21:53:59 -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 VAA17485; Fri, 5 Dec 1997 21:53:52 -0800 (PST) To: Mike Smith cc: Terry Lambert , hsu@FreeBSD.ORG (Jeffrey Hsu), hackers@hub.freebsd.org Subject: Re: shared library with static Motif? In-reply-to: Your message of "Sat, 06 Dec 1997 12:57:20 +1030." <199712060227.MAA00955@word.smith.net.au> Date: Fri, 05 Dec 1997 21:53:52 -0800 Message-ID: <17481.881387632@time.cdrom.com> From: "Jordan K. Hubbard" Sender: owner-freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG X-Loop: FreeBSD.org Precedence: bulk > 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