ODBC component licenses

[Steven Schveighoffer]

On Thu, 10 Nov 2011 23:01:57 -0500, Steve Teale  
<steve.teale at britseyeview.com> wrote:

> On Thu, 10 Nov 2011 12:39:28 -0800, Jonathan M Davis wrote:
>
>> On Thursday, November 10, 2011 19:13:00 Steve Teale wrote:
>>> On Thu, 10 Nov 2011 13:10:26 -0500, Jonathan M Davis wrote:
>>> > On Thursday, November 10, 2011 05:23 Steven Schveighoffer wrote:
>>> >> On Thu, 10 Nov 2011 00:55:01 -0500, Steve Teale
>>> >>
>>> >> <steve.teale at britseyeview.com> wrote:
>>> >> > The libraries for unixODBC and for FreeTDS (communication with SQL
>>> >
>>> > Though the fact that it needs to be in a separate shared object does
>>> > make it problematic to stick in Phobos, since Phobos is just one
>>> > shared object. So, if he's looking to put it _in_ Phobos, then I
>>> > don't think that we can do that with the current setup.
>>> >
>>> > - Jonathan M Davis
>>>
>>> So what about etc.curl for instance?
>
>> It's not LGPL.
>
> Steve thought linking to LGPL was not a problem - we link to glibc
>
> But it presumably has to be linked to a library?

I'm 100% sure linking to an LGPL shared object is fine for Phobos.

I'm not sure at all linking to an LGPL static library is fine for Phobos.   
There are both legal and philosophical issues to resolve.  From what I've  
read online, it appears to be legal with certain versions of the LGPL,  
maybe all of them.

BTW, I started reading this post thinking you were referring to yourself  
in the 3rd person :)

-Steve