> It's really annoying that any non-LGPL haskell project you release needs to be dynamically linked to libgmp instead of statically linked because of the LGPL restrictionss.
You should note that the FSF's opinion is that statically or dynamically linking does not alter the status of the result being derivative work or not.
> You should note that the FSF's opinion is that statically or dynamically linking does not alter the status of the result being derivative work or not.
Dynamic linking may or may not create a derivative work on applicable copyright law (on which matter the FSF's opinion is merely the FSF's opinion), but static linking involves directly embedding the libraries code into the final product, which is unmistakably within the exclusive rights of copyright.
In any case, the FSF's opinion on this issue actually makes the GPL more problematic than the alternative would make it.
Yes, but if you statically link, the LGPL requires providing a way for a user to switch to a modified version of the library (e.g. a .a of the rest of the application), which is more hassle than just using dynamic linking.
By definition, dynamic linking will be less of an hassle (and give better performance) than statically linking. After all, this is the original purpose of dynamic linking.
It is also more secure for the user of an computer system.
You should note that the FSF's opinion is that statically or dynamically linking does not alter the status of the result being derivative work or not.