glib dependency for the X Server

Greg Stark gsstark at
Mon Apr 3 08:42:23 PDT 2006

Alan Cox <alan at> writes:

> > In Eric's proposal Glib gets linked into the X server: you need it to 
> > run the server.
> > This is not at all the case with the C compiler (or with autotools and 
> > other [L]GPL like code already used).
> It appears nobody in this discussion has ever looked at the things they
> are discussing, which is a bit worrying given what is being discussed.
> The GNU C compiler does indeed link compiler related code into the X
> server and that code, like all code, is licensed.

As does bison and flex and other tools X uses. However in these cases these
tools have licenses that explicitly cover that code and have pretty much
unrestricted grants. The license in question is not at all similar to the

> The LGPL v BSD aspect of it appears to be pure politics.

Do any of the closed X server vendors currently ship statically linked
executables? How would they feel about having to provide linkable objects so
the user can relink the X server with a new version of the library?


More information about the xorg mailing list