On 11/16/2009 06:03 PM, Christian Krause wrote:
I'm a little bit unsure about:
- Does the fact, that the library is statically linked, affects the
compatibility or does the same rules apply as for dynamic linking?
For the purposes of Fedora's licensing, no, it doesn't really make a
difference.
- Since the LGPL sources would be in the src.rpm, do we have to
mention
both licenses in the spec file?
You can, but you do not need to. We determine License based on the binaries:
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/LicensingGuidelines#License:_field
Since the binary is a combination of the LGPLv2+ static library and the
GPLv2+ application code, while technically, the resulting work is
LGPLv2+ and GPLv2+, by honoring the terms of the GPLv2+, you are always
honoring the terms of LGPLv2+, so it is not necessary to explicitly list
it in the License tag.
~spot