Re: 64-bit version of Lilypond?

[David Kastrup]

Carl Sorensen <address@hidden> writes:

> On 2/25/19, 5:25 PM, "Karlin High" <address@hidden> wrote:
>
>     On 2/25/2019 10:44 AM, Carl Sorensen wrote:
>     > A further look into PureDarwin's website shows that many of the
>     > Darwin utilities in fact link to closed-source Apple libraries.
>     > 
>     > So probably we can't even ship a command-line-only version of
>     > LilyPond without having linking ability to OSX.
>     
>     Now, I expect the problem with linking to closed-source Apple libraries 
>     is that the GNU General Public License doesn't allow for it?
>     
>     On a non-GPL operating system, interaction with closed-source, non-free 
>     software can't really be avoided; where's the boundary for GPL 
>     acceptability?
>
>
> Reading from the GPL FAQ, it appears that as long as the libraries are
> System Libraries (and I think the OSX SDK libraries are System
> Libraries), and the libraries are linked as part of an executable,
> it's OK:

If we link with Apple libraries, we also need to heed the licensing
conditions of the Apple libraries.  Do they stand for this?

-- 
David Kastrup