Any license issues with DMD programs compiled for Mac OS X?

[Tony]

"Anders F Björklund" <afb at algonet.se> wrote in message 
news:dteg3q$smm$1 at digitaldaemon.com...
> Tony wrote:
>
>> I noticed that the Gnu D Compiler is (predictably) covered under the GPL.
>
> It uses large parts of gcc and g++, so this is something of a necessity.
>
> DMD (the frontend) is under a "Dual" license of both GPL and Artistic,
> while GDC (the adapation of the frontend to GCC) is under the GPL only.
>
>> While I realise that the license of the compiler itself shouldn't affect 
>> the license of the code it produces, are there any other issues which 
>> might force your compiled D code to be covered under the GPL?  Or under 
>> any license other than what the author chooses?
>>
>> For example, might it add some GPLed library functions to the runtime 
>> (thus make your code a derived work and forcing the adoption of a GPL 
>> license?)
>
> The Phobos library is zlib/png license*, and the C runtime under LGPL,
> so there should be no such GPL issues... Then again, I am not a lawyer.

Thanks for the information.

If the C runtime is under LGPL, does this mean that compiled code is a 
derivative work of the C runtime and thus also has to be placed under LGPL 
or GPL?  Or am I totally misunderstanding the situation ?


> But it shouldn't be different from using say C or C++, on Mac OS X ?
>
> --anders
>
> * for the most part, see
>   http://www.prowiki.org/wiki4d/wiki.cgi?PhobosLicenseIssues