Mold – A really fast linker
github.com
Mold – A really fast linker
1–10 of 64 posts
Re: Mold – A really fast linker
#2Note that there have been some license controversies with mold before, namely that they wanted to make all outputs AGPL, not simply mold itself [0], seems like they walked this policy back however [1].
> Open-source license: mold stays in AGPL, but _we claim AGPL propagates to the linker's output_. That is, we claim that the output from the linker is a derivative work of the linker. That's a bold claim but not entirely nonsense since the linker copies some code from itself to the an output. Therefore, there's room to claim that the linker's output is a derivative work of the linker, and since the linker is AGPL, the license propagates. I don't know if this claim will hold in court, but just buying a sold license would be much easier than using mold in an AGPL-incompatible way and challenging the claim in court.
Regardless of their current stance, this type of policy changes on a whim led me to remove mold from any of my systems, since I don't want all of my code in the future to automatically become AGPL, even by accident.
[0] https://bluewhalesystems.blogspot.com/2022/11/mold-linker-ma...
Re: Mold – A really fast linker
#3Note that there have been some license controversies with mold before, namely that they wanted to make all outputs AGPL, not simply mold itself [0], seems like they walked this policy back however [1]. > Open-source license: mold stays in AGPL, but _we claim AGPL propagates to the linker's output_. That is, we claim that the output from the linker is a derivative work of the linker. That's a bold claim but not entire…
Why is the AGPL such an issue?
Re: Mold – A really fast linker
#4Note that there have been some license controversies with mold before, namely that they wanted to make all outputs AGPL, not simply mold itself [0], seems like they walked this policy back however [1]. > Open-source license: mold stays in AGPL, but _we claim AGPL propagates to the linker's output_. That is, we claim that the output from the linker is a derivative work of the linker. That's a bold claim but not entire…
Why is the AGPL such an issue?
[deleted]
Re: Mold – A really fast linker
#5Note that there have been some license controversies with mold before, namely that they wanted to make all outputs AGPL, not simply mold itself [0], seems like they walked this policy back however [1]. > Open-source license: mold stays in AGPL, but _we claim AGPL propagates to the linker's output_. That is, we claim that the output from the linker is a derivative work of the linker. That's a bold claim but not entire…
Why is the AGPL such an issue?
It's not, if it's contained to just the linker itself (which it is now), that's not why I stopped using it. I did so because it seems like they don't understand that much about AGPL and licensing in general and could change their license terms at any point to say something like "we claim AGPL propagates to the linker's output" which is very legally tenuous itself to claim so.
Re: Mold – A really fast linker
#6Note that there have been some license controversies with mold before, namely that they wanted to make all outputs AGPL, not simply mold itself [0], seems like they walked this policy back however [1]. > Open-source license: mold stays in AGPL, but _we claim AGPL propagates to the linker's output_. That is, we claim that the output from the linker is a derivative work of the linker. That's a bold claim but not entire…
[deleted]
Re: Mold – A really fast linker
#7Note that there have been some license controversies with mold before, namely that they wanted to make all outputs AGPL, not simply mold itself [0], seems like they walked this policy back however [1]. > Open-source license: mold stays in AGPL, but _we claim AGPL propagates to the linker's output_. That is, we claim that the output from the linker is a derivative work of the linker. That's a bold claim but not entire…
wow. that borders on extortion... "you should really buy a license... who knows, otherwise your code might turn into AGPL, good luck with the expensive court fees..."
Re: Mold – A really fast linker
#8Note that there have been some license controversies with mold before, namely that they wanted to make all outputs AGPL, not simply mold itself [0], seems like they walked this policy back however [1]. > Open-source license: mold stays in AGPL, but _we claim AGPL propagates to the linker's output_. That is, we claim that the output from the linker is a derivative work of the linker. That's a bold claim but not entire…
Why is the AGPL such an issue?
Normally the tools people use don’t dictate the license they must use for their code.
Re: Mold – A really fast linker
#9Note that there have been some license controversies with mold before, namely that they wanted to make all outputs AGPL, not simply mold itself [0], seems like they walked this policy back however [1]. > Open-source license: mold stays in AGPL, but _we claim AGPL propagates to the linker's output_. That is, we claim that the output from the linker is a derivative work of the linker. That's a bold claim but not entire…
Why is the AGPL such an issue?
It's not an issue for linking AGPL code.
The issue was that they wanted to claim that AGPL was contagious - That by using mold, your outputs would also be required to become AGPL.
Re: Mold – A really fast linker
#10Note that there have been some license controversies with mold before, namely that they wanted to make all outputs AGPL, not simply mold itself [0], seems like they walked this policy back however [1]. > Open-source license: mold stays in AGPL, but _we claim AGPL propagates to the linker's output_. That is, we claim that the output from the linker is a derivative work of the linker. That's a bold claim but not entire…
Problem with my open-source startup: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1kiW9qmNlJ9oQZM6r5o4_N54s...
Worth a read and I'm sure Rui would appreciate ways to resolve this.