octave-maintainers
[Top][All Lists]
Advanced

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: More on MinGW build


From: Michael Goffioul
Subject: Re: More on MinGW build
Date: Thu, 27 Jan 2011 23:17:27 +0000

On Thu, Jan 27, 2011 at 8:48 PM, J Luis <address@hidden> wrote:
>> Also, with MSVC, you can't legally distribute the resulting binaries
>> due to licensing restrictions.  I don't know whether there are similar
>> problems with the Intel compilers.
>
> Excuse me to ask, but are you sure of that? I never heard such thing.
> MS has even free EXPRESS versions of their compilers.
> AFAIK what is not legal to distribute are the debug runtime MS libraries.

The whole problem is centered around whether the VC++ runtime DLL's
can be considered as part of the OS system or not (hence falling under
the GPL rules). That's a kind of grey zone where you'll find people thinking
one way, and other people thinking the other way. Though it seems from
the FSF clarification I received in 2009 (reproduced below) that you should
be allowed to redistribute MSVC-generated binaries, though not distributing
the runtime DLL bundled with the binaries (as in "how to make end user's
life more complicated").

Michael.

*************************************************************************************


> I have written to licensing at fsf dot org, asking them about the apparent
> contradiction between these clauses of the GPL and their FAQ. I'll let you
> know about the outcome.

Brett Smith's answer is:

============================================================================
> My argumentation is as follows:
>
>   - The libraries msvcr80.dll etc. are not part of a plain Windows
> installation.
> > (That's precisely the reason why the people distributing said
> installers
> > added them.)

While it is true that these libraries aren't installed with Windows by
default, they accompany the compiler used for these programs, so in
general it should at least be possible for them to qualify as system
libraries under both GPLv2 and v3.  However, I think you're right that
specific license terms in both versions of the GPL preclude people from
going so far as to include these libraries as part of the object code
for GPLed programs.


reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]