macOS distribution licensing?

[dale.albiston]

probably obvious, but since i've not placed the order for a mac (yet) i can't look it up with the docs the thing comes with.

say I write a program using the provided tools. what are my options for distribution?

I assume GPL is an option, but what about others? e.g. is it possible to use the apple supplied tools to write commercial software? and if not.. what compiler package would allow this on a a mac?

I'll be porting a small program of mine, it will probably never actually be released commercially (if it does it will be in the under 20 quid bracket probably) but it would be nice to know.

I hear that OSX is under the BSD license, which I could live with without issues.

just wondering.

 

[caveman_uk]

OS X is not under the BSD license. Parts of the underlying parts are but the whole OS isn't.

Going back to the dev tools. They are free (as in beer) and you can write commercial software with them. There is no licence fee.

 

[dale.albiston]

OS X is not under the BSD license. Parts of the underlying parts are but the whole OS isn't.

Going back to the dev tools. They are free (as in beer) and you can write commercial software with them. There is no licence fee.

oh i know i'm free to write stuff and release it.. the question is does anything i release fall under the GPL or can I use a different license?

 

[robbieduncan]

oh i know i'm free to write stuff and release it.. the question is does anything i release fall under the GPL or can I use a different license?

Unless you statically link against GPL code you can release whatever you want under whatever license you like. The development tools do not attach any conditions.

 

[cube]

I think if you dynamically link against GPL and the program requires that library you also fall under GPL.

 

[dale.albiston]

static linking i can cope with.. cool..

 

[cube]

Stallman says static and dynamic linking are the same for the purpose of the GPL and GPLv3 clarifies this issue, doesn't change it.

 

[dale.albiston]

Stallman says static and dynamic linking are the same for the purpose of the GPL and GPLv3 clarifies this issue, doesn't change it.

I'd assume the bits I write i can do what i like with, *if* they don't link to GPL code. If i remember i can link to LGPL code, as long as i don't change it (which i won't).

I can live with that, i think, have to check.

its a personal project, but if it actually works, and i polish it enough it could get a release (in the sub 20 quid range) *maybe* dunno, but want to know before I start.

given i can write stuff for windows with vb.net and do what i want with it.. there has to be a way of doing that on the mac. assuming of course i either write the stuff myself of use libraries that allow me to do this.

can see some checking of individual libraries comming up, which is probably not a bad thing.

 

[robbieduncan]

You can distribute (and charge for) stuff you write with XCode. If you only link to the libraries on the system you are fine. That keeps it simple.

 

[ChrisA]

say I write a program using the provided tools. what are my options for distribution?

I assume GPL is an option, but what about others? e.g. is it possible to use the apple supplied tools to write commercial software? and if not.. what compiler package would allow this on a a mac?

You can distribute the software you wrote any way you want. OSX is made up of many little parts, some are BSD some GPL and others. Much of it is compyright by Apple and not re-distributable. Your program can use the non-distributable copyrighten libraries because you will not distribute them. They will be supplied by for user and dynamically linked at run time.

 

[dale.albiston]

excellent, since if i do write anything i'll be using the system libraries, and writing anything else myself this answers the problem 100%.

happy now.

*if* i ever port anything elsewhere i'll look at the headaches at that time, and probably decide not to bother.