> Etwas genauer: Licensed under GPLv2 with the runtime exception.
Habe nun auch nachgesehen. Ich denke, es ist eine sehr entscheidender Hinweis den Du geliefert hast. Vor allem Dieser FAQ-Eintrag, der die runtime exception erklärt ist interessant:
What is GPL v2 with the runtime exception?
GPLv2 with the runtime exception is the license under which the source code of libstdc++ is distributed (see gcc.gnu.org/onlinedocs/libstdc++/17_intro/license.html). This runtime exception is therefore a standard for distributing template libraries and that is why TBB uses it.
und unter http://gcc.gnu.org/onlinedocs/libstdc++/17_intro/license.html steht:
Q: So any program which uses libstdc++ falls under the GPL? A: No. The special exception permits use of the library in proprietary applications.
Q: How is that different from the GNU {Lesser,Library} GPL? A: The LGPL requires that users be able to replace the LGPL code with a modified version; this is trivial if the library in question is a C shared library. But there's no way to make that work with C++, where much of the library consists of inline functions and templates, which are expanded inside the code that uses the library. So to allow people to replace the library code, someone using the library would have to distribute their own source, rendering the LGPL equivalent to the GPL.
Q: I see. So, what restrictions are there on programs that use the library? A: None. We encourage such programs to be released as open source, but we won't punish you or sue you if you choose otherwise.
Insofern ist es einfach inkorrekt nur von der GPL zu reden. Das klingt so, als könne man nur GPL-Programme damit erstellen. Diese Lizenz ist jedoch lockerer als die LGPL.
Habe nun auch nachgesehen. Ich denke, es ist eine sehr entscheidender Hinweis den Du geliefert hast.
Vor allem Dieser FAQ-Eintrag, der die runtime exception erklärt ist interessant:
What is GPL v2 with the runtime exception?
GPLv2 with the runtime exception is the license under which the source code of libstdc++ is distributed (see gcc.gnu.org/onlinedocs/libstdc++/17_intro/license.html). This runtime exception is therefore a standard for distributing template libraries and that is why TBB uses it.
und unter
http://gcc.gnu.org/onlinedocs/libstdc++/17_intro/license.html
steht:
Q: So any program which uses libstdc++ falls under the GPL?
A: No. The special exception permits use of the library in proprietary applications.
Q: How is that different from the GNU {Lesser,Library} GPL?
A: The LGPL requires that users be able to replace the LGPL code with a modified version; this is trivial if the library in question is a C shared library. But there's no way to make that work with C++, where much of the library consists of inline functions and templates, which are expanded inside the code that uses the library. So to allow people to replace the library code, someone using the library would have to distribute their own source, rendering the LGPL equivalent to the GPL.
Q: I see. So, what restrictions are there on programs that use the library?
A: None. We encourage such programs to be released as open source, but we won't punish you or sue you if you choose otherwise.
Insofern ist es einfach inkorrekt nur von der GPL zu reden. Das klingt so, als könne man nur GPL-Programme damit erstellen. Diese Lizenz ist jedoch lockerer als die LGPL.
Das wollte ich schon immer mal wissen - war nur zu faul, selbst mal zu suchen. :)
cya
Mr. Chauv