Re: rewrite try_dlopen (2)

[Bob Friesenhahn]

> > > Additionally, should then get_line() be getline() and LIBOBJed in the
> > > same manner as argz.c?
> >
> > Gary is best to answer that.
>
> Yes please.  We should coordinate this with the gnulib folks
> <address@hidden> who have a blessed (and debugged) getline.c that
> we might be able to use.  They are currently in the process of splitting
> the code into LGPL and GPL though, so it may be that their getline.c is
> GPL (or relies on another gnulib module that is GPL).  That would have
> some implications:
>
>  (i) libltdl is LGPL, and couldn't use a GPL gnulib getline.c
> (ii) gnulib may be interested in accepting an LGPL getline.c

Since we have a new member on the team, I would like to remind that 
libltdl has included this extra text in its license:

 "As a special exception to the GNU Lesser General Public License,
  if you distribute this file as part of a program or library that
  is built using GNU libtool, you may include it under the same
  distribution terms that you use for the rest of that program."

If the terms are changed, then there is a substantial impact for some 
libltdl users, particularly if libltdl is used as a "convenience" 
library.  As long as the software is contributed by the libtool team 
under the existing libtool license, then everything is ok.  If the 
existing copyright holder of useful LGPL code agrees to allow its use 
with our special exemption, then everything is ok.

Bob
======================================
Bob Friesenhahn
address@hidden
http://www.simplesystems.org/users/bfriesen