| From: | Bruno Wolff III <bruno(at)wolff(dot)to> |
|---|---|
| To: | Peter Galbavy <peter(dot)galbavy(at)knowtion(dot)net> |
| Cc: | pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: LGPL |
| Date: | 2005-06-18 14:23:50 |
| Message-ID: | 20050618142350.GD15547@wolff.to |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Sat, Jun 18, 2005 at 08:43:01 +0100,
Peter Galbavy <peter(dot)galbavy(at)knowtion(dot)net> wrote:
> Tom Lane wrote:
>
> >What is important is that it is possible, and useful, to build Postgres
> >in a completely non-GPL environment. If that were not so then I think
> >we'd have some license issues. But the fact that building PG in a
> >GPL-ized environment creates a GPL-ized binary is not a problem from my
> >point of view. You've already bought into the GPL if you're using that
> >environment.
> >
> >
> So, is there an effort to not require GNU make then ?
Neither using GNU make or gcc make to buld a binary make the resulting binary
bound by the GPL.
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Bruno Wolff III | 2005-06-18 14:36:00 | Re: default database creation with initdb |
| Previous Message | Bruce Momjian | 2005-06-18 14:20:07 | Re: [PATCHES] Escape handling in strings |