public licence and static linking

[QT-static-prgm]

Hello,

some guys told me that i'm not allowed to do static linking (for a stand-alone exe) using the free open source version of Qt.
Haven't found something about it in the Licence and there was no conflict when i compiled Qt source for static linking and open source Licence. To make sure to not violate the Qt Licence i'd like to know if anyone of you knows whether the static linking is permitted or not.

[aha_1980]

@QT-static-prgm

To make sure to not violate the Qt Licence i'd like to know if anyone of you knows whether the static linking is permitted or not.

Short answer is: not.

Reason: LGPL forces you to allow your users to re-link your program to a different library version, which is hard with static linking.

If you provide the means, however, it can still be allowed.

Disclaimer: I'm not a lawyer.

[QT-static-prgm]

All right, thanks for the info. Well the source is not actually released. It's a tutorial for Qt with an final "test" so the tutorial guides you to write the program yourself. To make it more visual there is that complete stand alone exe.

But in that case in accordance with the Licence i'll do it dynamic linked.

But if i'd publish the whole source code you'd be able to "relink" it and it should be no problem, right?

[aha_1980]

@QT-static-prgm if you publish the sources, static and dynamic linking should both be possible for your releases.

Disclaimer: I'm not a lawyer.

[VRonin]

@QT-static-prgm said in public licence and static linking:

But if i'd publish the whole source code you'd be able to "relink" it and it should be no problem, right?

If your program is released with GPL or any other less restrictive license (LGPL, MIT, Apache, etc.) and you are publishing the sources then you don't have to worry about anything