Re: Running Octave from Fink?

Alexander Hansen <[email protected]>
Newsgroups gmane.os.apple.fink.core,gmane.comp.gnu.octave.general
Organization Fink Core Team
Message-ID <[email protected]>
On 11/9/12 9:16 AM, Jordi Gutiérrez Hermoso wrote:
> On 8 November 2012 21:53, Richard Stallman <[email protected]> wrote:
>> You seem to be saying there is no issue.  Maybe so, but I can't
>> tell from that.
>>
>> Would those who DO believe there is an issue like to tell me
>> what the posited issue consists of?
> 
> Hi, Richard. Sorry, I thought you would be able to tell what the
> problem was, but I forgot that you're a busy man and have lots of
> email to read.
> 
> Let me try to summarise: distribution of free programs in Mac OS X is
> frequently done through three distribution methods: Fink, Macports,
> and Homebrew. All of these are essentially source-based distribution
> so the user has to also acquire a compiler in order to do this.
> Although both gcc and clang are available for Mac OS X, their most
> frequent method of distribution is through Xcode, which involves
> making the user accept some very restrictive licensing terms (I
> remember some NDA clauses, forbidding redistribution, and agreeing to
> be spied upon, but I may be misremembering).
> 
> Users of Mac OS X argue that since you're already agreeing to use a
> non-free OS, accepting Apple's terms again just to use a free compiler
> is moot, since you've already given up your freedom, while I feel
> uncomfortable with having to ask Octave users on Mac OS X to again
> submit themselves to Apple's will just so they can install Octave.
> 
> This could be fixed by ensuring that users can get a free distribution
> of gcc on Mac OS X, but there are some great difficulties involved
> therein, and morever, I believe that a majority of free programs
> distributed through Fink, Macports, and Homebrew depend on non-free
> libraries specific to Mac OS X, some of which to me do not seem to
> fall into the GPL's system library exemption.
> 
> - Jordi G. H.
> _______________________________________________

Why would they _not_ fall under the system library exemption?

For clarification:  I have mentioned "Xcode-specific items" and the like
in my correspondence, but I was perhaps being fast and loose in my
terminology.  Headers and other build-time files needed to use the
libraries are included with Xcode, or its command-line tools on current
OS X. However, the corresponding libraries are all included with the OS,
at least to the best of my knowledge.

"Xcode-specific" was intended to cover both the build-time files which
are installed by Xcode, and run-time libraries which are installed as
part of the OS, *but which can't be built against without those
build-time files* .
-- 
Alexander Hansen, Ph.D.
Fink User Liaison
My package updates: http://finkakh.wordpress.com/

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Everyone hates slow websites. So do we.
Make your web apps faster with AppDynamics
Download AppDynamics Lite for free today:
http://p.sf.net/sfu/appdyn_d2d_nov
_______________________________________________
fink-core mailing list
[email protected]
List archive:
http://news.gmane.org/gmane.os.apple.fink.core
Subscription management:
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/fink-core
lmpx.com only provides a reader for public news (NNTP) servers. It is not affiliated with the servers or forums shown here and is not responsible for the content of articles, which is written by their respective authors.