Hacker News Reader

Comment by sparkie | Hacker News Reader

I don't see get how the LGPL solves the problem the GPL had with Apple's policy. Particularly, 6.a of the LGPL cannot be met simultaneously with Apple's code signing mechanism; so that the user can modify the Library and then relink to produce a modified executable containing the modified Library.

View on HN

The full source code is provided and all the build script, see the beginning of 6.a. Any user can rebuild it.

How can the end-user then replace the executable on their iOS device ? That is the problem.

Get a developer license? The LGPL 2.x does not disallow tivioization. (Thank god)

That sounds like an "additional restriction" to me if you have to pay Apple.

Pretty sure the [L]GPLv2 is okay with this. For instance, say you have a Motorola Milestone. Motorola provides the changes they made to Linux, as they are required to, but you can't actually build a new kernel and put it on the phone; the Milestone's bootloader protection was never broken.

The original GPL licensed version had full source code and build scripts provided. How is this different?

The LGPLv2 still contains a clause which prevents you from adding additional restrictions, which Apple do in their policy. (10: ... You may not impose any further restrictions on the recipients' exercise of the rights granted herein. )

I believe, even if you compile from source, you still have additional restrictions placed on you, as Apple's policy for example, restricts you from putting the app on any more than 5 devices.

There is no limit on number of devices for iOS apps (provided they are devics you own or control for your own use). The 5 device limit is for DRM protected iTunes media.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com