From a technical standpoint, yes. From a legal standpoint:
If you dynamically link against an LGPLed library already present on the user’s computer, you need not convey the library’s source
Welcome to “what did you think was going to happen if you told for profit corporations that if they want to distribute a library in a bundle they also have to provide the source code but if they just provide it linked against an ancient version that nobody will be using in 5 years and don’t even tell you which one they’re 100% in compliance”?
Could they? yes. Will they? probably not, that takes too much work.
This is why steam’s own linux soldier runtime environment (Which is availible from the same dropdown as proton) had to become a thing.
From a technical standpoint, yes. From a legal standpoint:
Welcome to “what did you think was going to happen if you told for profit corporations that if they want to distribute a library in a bundle they also have to provide the source code but if they just provide it linked against an ancient version that nobody will be using in 5 years and don’t even tell you which one they’re 100% in compliance”?
Could they? yes. Will they? probably not, that takes too much work.
This is why steam’s own linux soldier runtime environment (Which is availible from the same dropdown as proton) had to become a thing.
Also, your OS will tell you which library it can’t find.
Is there a site to download various .so files?