[SDL] 1 frame per 2 seconds - what could be the problem?

Pavol Severa pavol.severa at gmail.com
Wed Nov 30 05:21:49 PST 2005


On Thu, Oct 27, 2005 at 10:14:53PM -0400, Elden Armbrust wrote:
<snip>
> Assume the following:
> Joe Shmoe makes a game, "Foobar the blogmeister." for the Sony PSP.
> (Assuming that...) The Sony PSP cannot link to shared libraries, and 
> therefore must be linked statically.
> The PSP SDK contains software which restricts the free distribution of 
> the code contained. (Read: You can't give away the SDK or any part thereof.)
> Now Joe wants to use SDL to handle all the menial work and get his game 
> working quickly.
> Picture a large flashing "NO!" sign.  That's exactly the answer he'd get 
> from a lawyer when asked if he could use SDL.
> SDL, according to the LGPL, requires that the source code to a work 
> which links statically must be available to the public.

Except no it doesn't.  It says you can distribute an object, which the user
can re-link a newer/different libSDL against.  You don't HAVE to release
source.  (Therein lies the core diff between GPL and LGPL, I believe.)


> However, Sonys PSP SDK almost certainly will not allow the source code 
> of their work to be given away.

And, see above, you don't have to.


> Likewise, the game itself might be the next Quake/Half-Life/Unreal which 
> Joe wants to keep hidden from prying eyes which might steal his work.

And, see above, don't release the source.


> Even without looking at company specific terms, the UMD used by the PSP 
> is unreadable (as far as I know) on anything but a PSP.

And I think the original poster you were replying to (and now I) believe
that this is Somebody Else's Problem (SEP). :^)


> This means that Joe must offer his source code via mail, the internet,
> or some other means.

_OR_ object code.


> Don't get me wrong, the LGPL/GPL licenses are great, but not 
> particularly conducive for use on an embedded platform.

Err, except...

  http://www.linuxdevices.com/articles/AT4936596231.html


> Remember that while many of us might not have a problem with open 
> sourcing our software, most companies are firmly against it still.
> Feel free to comment, take this to another conversation, do as you wish. 
> Consider my comments LGPL'ed. ;)

Heh, I would, but it seems from above you've confused GPL with LGPL ;)

-- 
-bill!
bill at newbreedsoftware.com
http://www.newbreedsoftware.com/




More information about the SDL mailing list