Re: [chicken-users] silex GPL-2 licensed?

[John Cowan]

Leonardo Valeri Manera scripsit:

> Ok, so /binary/ programs that use silex in some way dont need to be
> GPL'd because of that.

+1

> I take it that this means that silex is never a runtime dependency.

I take it so too.

> Does this mean distributing the c intermediates of an app along with
> the chicken libraries (in c form) and eggs (again in c form) needed to
> run it therefore has no need for silex either and can be distributed
> under, for example, a BSD license?

That's right.  Of course, if you use a GPLed egg, you have to distribute
Scheme source for your whole app.  C source is obfuscated and doesn't
count for GPL purposes.

-- 
Is not a patron, my Lord [Chesterfield],        John Cowan
one who looks with unconcern on a man           http://www.ccil.org/~cowan
struggling for life in the water, and when      address@hidden
he has reached ground encumbers him with help?
        --Samuel Johnson