Re: Microsoft library licenses

[robert . thorpe]

John Hasler wrote:
> Rob Thorpe writes:
> > Is there a list anywhere of which Microsoft libraries have licenses
> > that prevent them from being dynamically linked against GPL
software.
>
> > Especially, do any of the Win32 SDK libraries have such a license?
> > (ie. gdi32.dll, comctl32.dll, user32.dll)
>
> From the GPL:
>
>   The source code for a work means the preferred form of the work for
>   making modifications to it.  For an executable work, complete
source code
>   means all the source code for all modules it contains, plus any
>   associated interface definition files, plus the scripts used to
control
>   compilation and installation of the executable.  However, as a
special
>   exception, the source code distributed need not include anything
that is
>   normally distributed (in either source or binary form) with the
major
>   components (compiler, kernel, and so on) of the operating system on
which
>   the executable runs, unless that component itself accompanies the
>   executable.
>
> Note especially the last sentence.

Thanks, yes I know about that.
I'm not worried about the GPL but about Microsoft's licenses.  Some
Microsoft library licenses specifically prohibit linking them against
software licensed in terms they class as "viral", which includes the
GPL.
I was hoping someone would have a list of which libraries do this.