You have to provide the source code for the version of the library you’re linking somewhere. So basically if you ship a static linked glibc executable, you need to provide the source code for the glibc part that you included. I think the actual ideal way to distribute it would be to not statically link it and instead deliver a shared library bundled with your application.
EDIT: Statically linking libc is also a big pain in general, for exampled you lose dlopen. It’s best not to statically link it if possible. All other libraries, go for it.
They missed the first character because they took the L
It should be noted that statically linking against an LGPL library does still come with some constraints. https://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl-faq.html#LGPLStaticVsDynamic
You have to provide the source code for the version of the library you’re linking somewhere. So basically if you ship a static linked glibc executable, you need to provide the source code for the glibc part that you included. I think the actual ideal way to distribute it would be to not statically link it and instead deliver a shared library bundled with your application.
EDIT: Statically linking libc is also a big pain in general, for exampled you lose
dlopen. It’s best not to statically link it if possible. All other libraries, go for it.