Re: MiNTlib and GPL was: RE: getopt

[Teemu Hukkanen <tjhukkan@fishpool.com>]

Tamminen Eero <t150315@students.cc.tut.fi> writes:

> > > >Any objections from the user community if I just grab GNU
> > > >getopt() and put it in the MiNTlib instead of what's there now? 
> > > I think this would change the copyright status from freeware to GPL. Thus 
> > > you wouldn't be allowed to distribute binary only versions of programs 
> > > linked with the MiNT lib.
> > 
> > The MiNTlib currently contains two GPLd files: libgcc2.c and
> > obstack.c.  If I understand the terms of the license, those two
> > files should be distributed separately or the entire MiNTlib has
> > to be distributed under the terms of the GNU Library GPL.
> > Advice, corrections, and (temperate) opinions?
> 
> Would the inclusion of those files increase the binary package size
> significantly?
> 
> AFAIK LGPL just say that source should be provided for the user without
> further cost (except for the media)?  Wouldn't it be enough just to
> include ftp addresses on common servers for these sources?

AFAIK, yes.
I can't see a problem in having the MintLibs under the GNU library
license, unless there is some code in the libs which just can't go under
the LGPL.