Linked by Thom Holwerda on Mon 9th May 2011 21:46 UTC
Thread beginning with comment 472465
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
"Anyway, not only is Apple under no obligation to ensure you can build the library their in no way obligated to even release source when they create a combined work as long as they ...
Yeah how about you go back and read the LGPL, kid. "
Apple are under the obligation to provide enough source and where applicable object code to compile the code. What they are NOT obligated to do is supply the source code for the proprietary sections that they only provide as object code. If they didn't supply the object code, they are indeed in LGPL violation.




Member since:
2006-01-01
So a random dude writes a 2 line post on hacker news and this becomes the basis for an 8 line tirade based on 0 actual fact.
Honestly.
Anyway, not only is Apple under no obligation to ensure you can build the library their in no way obligated to even release source when they create a combined work as long as they ...
"Give prominent notice with the combined library that part of it is a work based on the Library, and explaining where to find the accompanying uncombined form of the same work"
]{