You’re partly correct… Turns out it’s actually (capital letters):
It still makes absolutely no sense to have some developer’s private home directory path embedded in the binary; that is never going to be correct for anyone else. So you might want to consider setting the hardcoded path to refer to the one in /Applications/Muse/… which means it would work for the default installation.
It might also be a good idea to put this vital piece of information in the tutorial (https://sites.google.com/a/interaxon.ca/muse-developer-site/museio/tutorial). In there it says the binary is added to your path (it isn’t and shouldn’t be, of course) and also it mentions nothing of the DYLD problem.
As for “FOSS license”, I guess you’re referring to the use of GPL’ed code, not FOSS in general? If so, this is what gnu says about the two license: [I]Does the GPL have different requirements for statically vs dynamically linked modules with a covered work? (#GPLStaticVsDynamic)[/I] [I]No. Linking a GPL covered work statically or dynamically with other modules is making a combined work based on the GPL covered work. Thus, the terms and conditions of the GNU General Public License cover the whole combination. See also What legal issues come up if I use GPL-incompatible libraries with GPL software?[/I]
[I]Does the LGPL have different requirements for statically vs dynamically linked modules with a covered work? (#LGPLStaticVsDynamic)[/I] [I]For the purpose of complying with the LGPL (any extant version: v2, v2.1 or v3):[/I]
[INDENT] I If you statically link against an LGPL’d library, you must also provide your application in an object (not necessarily source) format, so that a user has the opportunity to modify the library and relink the application.[/I]
I If you dynamically link against an LGPL’d library already present on the user’s computer, you need not convey the library’s source. On the other hand, if you yourself convey the executable LGPL’d library along with your application, whether linked with statically or dynamically, you must also convey the library’s sources, in one of the ways for which the LGPL provides.[/I]
[/INDENT] So if you’re using LGPL code and would have linked it statically, you need to provide a linkable object format. If you link dynamically, you don’t need to. In both cases you’d need to provide the library source (as you distribute the library). If you’re using GPL code, there is no difference whether you link statically or dynamically…
So I guess you’re using LGPL code also – even though it looks like the particular library in question (lsl) might actually be covered my an MIT licence, in which case it probably makes no difference how you link.
Anyway, sorry for the digression and thanks for your reply,