On Mon, Apr 20, 2009 at 7:23 PM, John W. Eaton <[email protected]> wrote: > On 20-Apr-2009, Michael Goffioul wrote: > > | On Mon, Apr 20, 2009 at 12:52 PM, Kustaa Nyholm > | <[email protected]> wrote: > | > Out of curiosity, would be interesting to understand exactly why this is > | > allegedly violation of GPLv2? > | > | This paragraph from GPLv2 > | > | == > | The source code for a work means the preferred form of the work for > | making modifications to it. For an executable work, complete source > | code means all the source code for all modules it contains, plus any > | associated interface definition files, plus the scripts used to > | control compilation and installation of the executable. However, as a > | special exception, the source code distributed need not include > | anything that is normally distributed (in either source or binary > | form) with the major components (compiler, kernel, and so on) of the > | operating system on which the executable runs, unless that component > | itself accompanies the executable. > | == > > | In other words, you can link against VC++ runtime libs, but you can't > | include them into an installer for user convenience. > > I can't see how the quoted clause implies this restriction. > > My understanding is that the quoted clause from the GPL is intended to > allow you to link with "system components" which might be distributed > under GPL-incompatible terms and for which there is no corresponding > source code. CLN and GiNaC are not system components that are > normally distributed with the major components of any operating > system, so the exception granted by this clause does not apply, so to > link GiNaC and CLN with Octave, it must be possible to distribute all > of the parts under terms that are compatible with the GPL. > > Who complained about your method of binary distribution, and why? The > GPL specifically allows binary distributions provided that you make > the corresponding source code available under the terms of the GPL. > > I don't see how it would be a violation of the GPL if you > > link Octave with a library that is distributed under GPL compatible > terms (GiNaC, CLN, and Octave are all GPL) > > distribute the binary version of the library in some kind of > installer/package management system > > make the source for everything available along with the binary > distribution or otherwise make the sources available in another way > as required by the GPL > > If you are providing sources for the parts you distribute, then I > don't see the problem. >
If I understood Michael correctly, the key problem is that the installer also installs the necessary VC++ runtime libraries. -- RNDr. Jaroslav Hajek computing expert & GNU Octave developer Aeronautical Research and Test Institute (VZLU) Prague, Czech Republic url: www.highegg.matfyz.cz ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Stay on top of everything new and different, both inside and around Java (TM) technology - register by April 22, and save $200 on the JavaOne (SM) conference, June 2-5, 2009, San Francisco. 300 plus technical and hands-on sessions. Register today. Use priority code J9JMT32. http://p.sf.net/sfu/p _______________________________________________ Octave-dev mailing list [email protected] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/octave-dev
