RFC : Heap management using TLSF

[joel.sherrill at OARcorp.com (Joel Sherrill)]

Keith Robertson wrote:
> Chris Caudle wrote:
>   
>> Is LGPL compatible to ship with the GPL-plus-exceptions license of RTEMS?
>> I have to admit, I'm not quite clear on what the difference is between
>> RTEMS variant of GPL and LGPL, or why RTEMS did not use LGPL.  Is it
>> historical, e.g. LGPL did not exist at the time the decision was made?
>>     
>
> I seem to recall that a member of the list (possibly Pavel?) knew the
> author of TLSF and thought that if there was a licensing problem, the
> author may be willing to relicense it under an rtems compatible license.
>
>   
This is true.
> As an aside, I too would be interested to understand the difference
> between LGPL and GPL + rtems exception.
>   
The RTEMS exception does not place any restrictions on
the user's application.

When applications are statically linked, the LGPL requires
that (as a minimum) you provide your closed source code
in binary object form so it can be relinked with new or
modified versions of the LGPL code.

In dynamically linked systems, the "relinking" step is
automatic and hidden so it is generally considered OK
to ship closed source binaries which are dynamically linked.
What happens when the library's interface changes and
the automatic linking is not an option?  I don't know.

Dynamic linking side steps a number of these licensing
issues.
> Keith
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> rtems-users mailing list
> rtems-users at rtems.com
> http://rtems.rtems.org/mailman/listinfo/rtems-users
>   


-- 
Joel Sherrill, Ph.D.             Director of Research & Development
joel.sherrill at OARcorp.com        On-Line Applications Research
Ask me about RTEMS: a free RTOS  Huntsville AL 35805
   Support Available             (256) 722-9985