The freepascal RTL is released under a modified LGPL license that allows you to do almost everything
like a BSD license with a small gpl restriction. This is not GPL and is not LGPL in any way.
Why do people call it LGPL when it's not? Modified LGPL licenses are a joke because they go against the entire spirit of GPL and LGPL. The freepascal RTL literally allows you to compile in code and link it to other non gpl and non lgpl code, full proprietary... Completely against GPL and LGPL mindset. So why are people still calling it LGPL if it's nothing of the sort? See how the LGPL name infects people and they still belong to the cult even though they aren't practicing what the cult preaches?
For fucks sakes people if you are developing BSD like code in bsd spirit, please call it BSD not modified LGPL ! The freepascal rtl is an example of a strange cult holding on to the LGPL label, while practicing nothing of the LGPL sorts! It's like some kind of strange apache/mozilla/bsd attitude toward software development, but they call the license "modified LGPL". What in the hell, is pretty much everything under the sun a modified LGPL if you twist it in such a way?
If you don't get what I am saying because you don't know about FPC rtl and how it works I will summarize it for you: the FPC RTL is a bunch of source code that is included in your applications. Example: date and time routines, system utilities, etc. Almost all programmers use the FPC RTL if they use the freepascal compiler. You can sell a completely proprietary application if you use the freepascal RTL, and it is not a DLL or DSO or library, but rather code that is linked directly into your application. You do not have to release your application as a GPL or LGPL app. You can go full proprietary. And you are using LGPL code in your app (modified LGPL). So effectively it's a BSD rtl, or a apache/mozilla/mit style RTL that allows you to use for whatever purpose, even proprietary. It's nothing of the GPL or LGPL spirit at all.
The only thing FPC rtl has in common with LGPL, is that if you improve the RTL, you send back your contributions, so it's not a full BSD license. However it is certainly not LGPL or GPL, as LGPL and GPL are much more restrictive on code that is linked in statically. So why does FPC call it LGPL and not mozilla/apache or some license that describes the real spirit they are intending? Answer: GPL cult members love to use the label of GPL even if they violate every aspect of GPL. Sort of like a catholic who uses birth control even though the church says you must use birth control. People love to remain catholic even if they violate everything the church says, because they love to have a label like christian catholic.
The LGPL and GPL violators and modifiers love to pretend they are still being ethically okay according to the cult. In order to obey the ethics they just change the ethics on a whim! Modify the cult to our little sect that has completely different rules! Like a sect of christianity that sort of follows jesus teachings but not really. Okay yeah gotchya. Hate to pick on christians here but there are so many variations of christianity and all its cults. As long as we slap the LGPL brand name on it, it's good to go, even if it's nothing of the LGPL spirit? That's what the FPC rtl does.
No disrespect meant to freepascal programmers as programmers - but rather some disrespect meant toward them as license choosers or chosers.
Actions speak louder than words.. if you actually talk to freepascal programmers they are very proprietary friendly and have supported closed projects like Morfik and others. They are nothing of the GPL sorts. So why are they releasing code with the GPL/LGPL name on it? I am speaking of the RTL here, not the compiler itself. Their compiler obeys the spirit of GPL as they want people to have the compiler but not release it modified proprietary (however, Morfik was an example of possibly violating GPL there but that's another story and an edge case)
It's equivalent to a "modified vegan" lifestyle. I'm a vegan, who eats meat, eggs, and cheese. But I'm still a vegan. Yeah, okay. Gotchya. Makes sense. Ugh. We realize you really like calling yourself vegan, but you're not a fucking vegan if you violate every vegan principle. So why do you call yourself vegan? The more modified LGPL code that is out there, the more we can laugh at how the GPL doesn't really work in practice. But of course the cult still gets fame and donations because someone slapped the GPL label onto it. Free advertising for GPL GNU project!