[Qt-interest] Qt 4.5 Open Source (Windows) -- is it legal to redistribute the Qt DLLs?

[Kermit Mei]

On Sat, 2009-03-21 at 09:48 +0100, Thiago Macieira wrote:
> Kermit Mei wrote:
> >On Fri, 2009-03-20 at 16:35 -0300, Wagner Sales wrote:
> >> No. A basic rule for GPL/LGPL are the output of the GPL/LGPL program
> >> don't needs to be open. For example, if you compile with gcc, your
> >> program don't need be under the same license. This rule aplies for
> 
> 
> >If I use the GPL program's libs, must I distribute my program under GPL?
> >For example, I use gcc compile a program on Linux, and use the
> >libpthread.so which is protected by GPLv2. Then, Am I forced to put my
> >source under GPLv2? I feel some conflict when non-open source run on
> >Linux ...
> 
> Please re-read what Wagner said. I have left the important part above.
> 
> You'd be correct in your assessment too if libpthread were under the 
> GPLv2. It's not.
 Oh, thanks. pthread.h is a part of GNU C Lib and it is published under
LGPL too. But sir, I consider that GNU C must use the linux kernel's
interface and libs? And if it use these GPLv2 based code, then it at
least be GPLv2, but not LGPL.

I know I'm not right, but I don't know why.

Thanks. 
Kermit