Re: RE: [avr-chat] µC/avr crypto lib

[Bob Blick]

On Fri, 25 Jul 2008 07:20:00 -0600, "Weddington, Eric"
<address@hidden> said:

> Note that in my original post I also mentioned GPL+exception, which is
> the license of libgcc (that comes with the compiler). Others (in the
> past) have pointed out to me that this is different from LGPL. As, I
> guess, the LGPL has some other issues with it as well that make it
> non-ideal. Having a library licensed as GPL+exception ensures that any
> changes to the library remain open and free, but that it can be linked
> with proprietary applications and those applications can remain
> proprietary.

Hi Eric,

This is a snippet I found when searching for "libgcc license exception":

...In addition to the permissions in the GNU General Public License,
  the Free Software Foundation gives you unlimited permission to link
  the compiled version of this file into combinations with other
  programs, and to distribute those combinations without any
  restriction coming from the use of this file.  (The General Public
  License restrictions do apply in other respects; for example, they
  cover modification of the file, and distribution when not linked
  into a combine executable.)...

And I also ran into the eCos exception at:

http://www.fsf.org/licensing/licenses/ecos-license.html

It's short but here's the main part:

....As a special exception, if other files instantiate templates or use
macros or inline functions from this file, or you compile this file and
link it with other works to produce a work based on this file, this file
does not by itself cause the resulting work to be covered by the GNU
General Public License. However the source code for this file must still
be made available in accordance with section (3) of the GNU General
Public License.

This exception does not invalidate any other reasons why a work based on
this file might be covered by the GNU General Public License....

-- 
http://www.fastmail.fm - Does exactly what it says on the tin