Re: psql & readline & win32

> Robert Treat <xzilla(at)users(dot)sourceforge(dot)net> writes:
> > On Sunday 01 January 2006 18:51, Andrew Dunstan wrote:
> >> This has been debated ad nauseam in the past. The consensus, bar a
> >> few people with more advanced paranoia than I suffer from,
> is that we
> >> can ;-)
>
> > I don't think it is good practice to ship packaged software that is
> > statically linked to a gpl library and then claim that your
> package is bsd licensed.
>
> Robert is 100% right. If the Readline people wanted non-GPL
> packages linking to their code, they'd have used LGPL not
> GPL. We must not ignore their clear intentions; to do so is
> certainly unethical and probably illegal.

Does it make a difference if we ship it dynamically linked against a
DLL? Because we can do that pretty easily.

> Anyone for trying to port BSD libedit to work on Windows?

I googled a bit on that as well, and turns out that somebody did try it,
and it wasn't easy. And from what I can tell, not complete yet.

http://www.coldie.net/node/131

I'm sure it *can* be done, but it's probably quite a bit of work.

> (Of course, you could also treat the Windows installer as
> being entirely GPL-licensed, which would effectively comply
> with both upstream licenses. But I don't find that an
> appealing solution.)

Me either.

Though we do ship GPL stuff in it already - postgis to be specific. But
we don't link against that, we just load the module at runtime...

//Magnus