The usual disclaimers of warranty apply, as detailed in the LPGL.
Like the more widely known GNU GPL (General Public License), the LGPL gives you the right to read, compile, and modify the source code as you wish. You may also redistribute the source code, either gratis or for a fee, so long as you do so under the same license. See the text of the license for the legalistic details.
The LGPL differs from the GPL mainly in that it permits the incorporation of the free software in proprietary software as well as in other free software. The "L" in "LGPL" originally stood for "Library". The change to "Lesser" was probably intended as a not-so-subtle pejorative. The luminaries of the FSF prefer that developers of free software use the GPL in all but a few exceptional cases.
Their rationale: since the GPL does not permit the use of the software so licensed in proprietary software, it gives the developers of free software an advantage over the developers of proprietary software, which the FSF regards as ethically tainted because of its proprietary status.
I do not carry the same ideological baggage. I write software for a living, and I resent the implication that neither I nor my employer has a right to be paid for it. If I contribute to the free software community, it is my choice, not my duty. Though there are ways to make money from free software, it is unrealistic to ask the entire software industry to adopt such a narrow business model.
By all means, let free software grow and prosper -- but on its own merits, not by arbitrary and invidious discrimination.
Home