Re: MSVC runtime library license problem

[David Bateman]

So the problem is on the GPL side as msvcr70.dll is closed source and so
can't be linked with a GPL program.. If that is a valid argument then
any compiler that has a support library that is closed source can not be
used to distribute GPL software. Does Intel's icc for example link
against a support library? Does that prevent distribution? This is a
major headache, and I'd hate to see the MSVC build thrown out, though I
suppose we might go back to a mingw build if we have to...

D.


address@hidden wrote:
> > This makes no sense... This effectively means that MSVC is useless as no
> > one can distribute binaries build with it.....
>  
> The things that triggered me are 2 things I read in readme's of other
> packages:
> 1) in README.win32 of glib-2.19 (LGPL), one can read
> ===
> Presumably, if compiled with MSVC.NET, it also works with
> MSVCR70.DLL. Please note that it's dubious if you would be allowed by
> the license to distrubute a GLib linked to MSVCR70.DLL, as it is not
> part of the operating system, but of the MSVC product. MSVCRT.DLL is
> part of Windows.
> ===
> 2) in README.wo32 of gettext-0.15 (GPL), one can read
> ===
>   Note that binaries created with MSVC 7.0 should not be distributed: They
>   depend on a closed-source library 'msvcr70.dll' which is not
> normally part
>   of a Woe32 installation. You cannot distribute 'msvcr70.dll' with the
>   binaries - this would be a violation of the GPL and of the Microsoft
> EULA.
>   You can distribute the binaries without including 'msvcr70.dll', but
> this
>   will cause problems for users that don't have this library on their
> system.
>   Therefore it is not recommended. This problem does not occur with
> MSVC 6.0
>   and earlier.
> ===
>  
> [I'm not an expert in license...]
> So, if I understand this correctly, the problem is a matter of
> distributing
> binary packages. You can't include MS runtime libs in a binary package of
> (L)GPL code. But I guess, nothing prevents you from distributing those
> libs
> as a separate package.
>  
> > How do commercial developers deal with this?
>  
> If the problem is really a matter of combining MS runtime libs with GPL
> binary code into a single package, then I don't think commercial
> developers
> have that problem.
>  
> > Is this license restriction only on the free
> > version of MSVC? If so does it go away with a commercial license? If so
> > I'm for starting a charity to get you a commercial license of MSVC and
> > be done with it..
>  
> I don't think this is a matter of free/commercial version of Visual
> Studio.
> A commercial VS install also contains binary packages for
> redistributing the
> runtime libs. I guess those packages are the same as the ones you can
> download from MS web site and are covered with the same EULA.
> (but thanks for the proposal... ;-)
>  
> Michael.
>  


-- 
David Bateman                                address@hidden
Motorola Labs - Paris                        +33 1 69 35 48 04 (Ph) 
Parc Les Algorithmes, Commune de St Aubin    +33 6 72 01 06 33 (Mob) 
91193 Gif-Sur-Yvette FRANCE                  +33 1 69 35 77 01 (Fax) 

The information contained in this communication has been classified as: 

[x] General Business Information 
[ ] Motorola Internal Use Only 
[ ] Motorola Confidential Proprietary