Re: [boost] Can a Boost library use a component like GMP and mfpr that have a LGPL license ?

Subject: Re: [boost] Can a Boost library use a component like GMP and mfpr that have a LGPL license ?
From: Sebastian Redl (sebastian.redl_at_[hidden])
Date: 2009-03-23 14:01:29

Simonson, Lucanus J wrote:
> Sebastian Redl wrote:
>   
>> My company, for example, would be interested in the BGL, but quite
>> unable 
>> to include an LGPL library, since our copy protection mechanism kills
>> the application if it detects a debugger. This would be a license
>> violation. (We probably wouldn't need bignum functionality. As long
>> as the BGL can be used without the bignum libraries, we'd probably be
>> happy.) 
>>
>>     
>
> Huh, they basically exclude copy protection in the terms of their license?
They require that it is still possible to debug the LGPLed library in
the context of the combined work. If there's a debugger killer as part
of the copy protection (and every effective CP needs one), that's
obviously not possible.
>   I didn't trust the LGPL when I read it because it was obviously written by a lawyer.  Did you mean GTL and type BGL by mistake?
>   
Yes. I typed BGL for Boost Geometry Library. Isn't one of the geometry
libraries called that?
> Ideally I'd like to eliminate dependence on big-num for robustness, for performance reasons if not license concerns, but this requires some fancy programming.  For instance, the degree-2 predicate of slope comparison requires 65 bits when the input is 32 bit coordinates.
I'm fairly certain that I don't need that. So it's a question of how
modular the library is.

Sebastian