On 3/29/23 15:33, Esme Povirk wrote:
OK, maybe it's more complicated than I thought. Here's my best guess from what I know:
In the case of Tivoization, the GPL code isn't linked with any proprietary code. The user can still build the program as a whole, but is unable to sign it so that the device will execute it.
In this case, LGPL code is linked with proprietary code: both the game itself and the vendor's libraries. In this situation, section 6 requires a way for the user to relink the rest of the code to their modified version of the library: either source code, object code, or a dynamically linked binary. A game developer could theoretically distribute their game's source code or object code without the assets, but they cannot redistribute the tools and libraries from the platform vendor to the general public.
Oh, interesting, so I guess LGPL 2 effectively also prevents tivoization. Actually, now that you've explained it, I vaguely remember that being discussed last Wineconf (either as part of Bradley Kuhn's talk or a more informal conversation).