[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [fink-core] Running Octave from Fink?
From: |
Sergei Steshenko |
Subject: |
Re: [fink-core] Running Octave from Fink? |
Date: |
Sat, 10 Nov 2012 19:46:05 -0800 (PST) |
----- Original Message -----
> From: Alexander Hansen <address@hidden>
> To: address@hidden
> Cc: address@hidden; address@hidden; address@hidden; address@hidden;
> address@hidden
> Sent: Saturday, November 10, 2012 11:35 PM
> Subject: Re: [fink-core] Running Octave from Fink?
>
> On 11/10/12 11:26 AM, Richard Stallman wrote:
>> This discussion started with Gnu Octave. Octave is an interpreter, so
> there
>> are no downstream products. In what way can Apple's shenanigans on
> OS X
>> create issues for users here? They are executing their code on the same
>> non-free machine it was compiled on, and they have already agreed to
> said
>> non-free environment.
>>
>> We cannot allow people to add nonfree code to GPL-covered programs.
>> If that were allowed, people could release nonfree code to extend
>> GPL-covered programs, which is tantamount to making nonfree extended
>> versions of them.
>>
>> I designed the system library exception carefully to avoid opening up
>> that danger.
>>
>> That the code runs on a nonfree platform is no excuse for respecting
>> the users' freedom less. The system library exception is meant to
>> cover the code that belongs to the system itself. If we allowed
>> anything more, could we distinguish it from an arbitrary proprietary
>> add-on?
>>
>> I have not finished reading all the mail you've sent, because it is
>> too much! So I don't know how these points apply to the current
>> situation, and I don't have any conclusion to state about this case.
>>
>
> Executive summary:
>
> 1) The Xcode development tools package, whatever you think of its
> license, installs compiler executables, since none come with the OS,
> other executables useful to developers which don't come with the OS, and
> headers.
> (I _did_ find some libraries, but they are specifically for svn, which
> comes with Xcode rather than being part of the OS. We aren't talking
> about Octave linking to those--which would indeed be a problem)
>
> 2) The proprietary libraries that are linked by one of the OS X source
> packaging tools ship as part of the OS, and are installed by default.
> They're standard components. No additional proprietary runtime
> component is required. And we always strive to make sure that packages
> are compliant with the various licenses we work with, even when the
> upstream developers seem not to get it: for example, gnuplot is
> manifestly not GPL-compatible, yet its build defaults to using GNU
> readline if present, so I explicitly make it avoid using GNU readline as
> distributed in Fink.
>
> 3) All of the various distributions discussed--Fink, Homebrew, and
> Macports--are source-based. In fact, for Fink on OS 10.6 and later,
> users only start with Xcode and source scripts, and there is _no_ binary
> component. And we make them install Xcode because they need _something_
> to start with to build packages.
> 3A) Nobody seems to know of a fully libre self-consistent build toolset
> for current OS X, so we're not insisting on Xcode to be (unpaid) Apple
> shills.
> 3B) If such a toolset did in fact exist, even if the Fink Project didn't
> switch to use it because we build a wide range of packages, including
> some that require access to Apple's proprietary libraries and therefore
> need Xcode to build, our code and package build prescriptions are free
> for anybody to examine, make a fork from, make change requests upon, etc...
>
> So basically, we're trying to do as right by everybody as circumstances
> permit. Barring somebody presenting us with a build tool solution that
> will do the job, we're left with only the Xcode option.
> --
> Alexander Hansen, Ph.D.
> Fink User Liaison
> My package updates: http://finkakh.wordpress.com/
> _______________________________________________
> Help-octave mailing list
> address@hidden
> https://mailman.cae.wisc.edu/listinfo/help-octave
"All of the various distributions discussed--Fink, Homebrew, and
Macports--are source-based" - enough said.
_No_ distribution, building on site. Since no distribution, no GPL violation.
And, as I wrote earlier, _no_ issue.
Regards,
Sergei.
>
- Re: [fink-core] Running Octave from Fink?, (continued)
- Re: [fink-core] Running Octave from Fink?, Richard Stallman, 2012/11/13
- Re: [fink-core] Running Octave from Fink?, Sergei Steshenko, 2012/11/13
- Re: [fink-core] Running Octave from Fink?, Richard Stallman, 2012/11/13
- Re: [fink-core] Running Octave from Fink?, Sergei Steshenko, 2012/11/13
- Re: [fink-core] Running Octave from Fink?, Richard Stallman, 2012/11/14
- Re: [fink-core] Running Octave from Fink?, edmund ronald, 2012/11/13
- Re: [fink-core] Running Octave from Fink?, Richard Stallman, 2012/11/14
- Re: [fink-core] Running Octave from Fink?, Ben Abbott, 2012/11/12
- Re: [fink-core] Running Octave from Fink?, Richard Stallman, 2012/11/12
- Re: [fink-core] Running Octave from Fink?, Alexander Hansen, 2012/11/10
- Re: [fink-core] Running Octave from Fink?,
Sergei Steshenko <=
- Re: [fink-core] Running Octave from Fink?, Richard Stallman, 2012/11/10
- Re: [fink-core] Running Octave from Fink?, Sergei Steshenko, 2012/11/10
- Re: [fink-core] Running Octave from Fink?, David R. Morrison, 2012/11/08
- Re: [fink-core] Running Octave from Fink?, Alexander Hansen, 2012/11/08
- Re: Running Octave from Fink?, Sergei Steshenko, 2012/11/06
- Re: Running Octave from Fink?, Sergei Steshenko, 2012/11/05
- Re: Running Octave from Fink?, Sergei Steshenko, 2012/11/05
- Re: Running Octave from Fink?, Ev Yemini, 2012/11/06
- Re: Running Octave from Fink?, Sergei Steshenko, 2012/11/06
- Re: Running Octave from Fink?, Ev Yemini, 2012/11/06