Re: MSVC runtime library license problem

[Eric S. Carlson]

Things are not really clear with express edition runtime libs or
distributables. On the other hand, msvc 2003 (with rt msvcrt71.dll) has a
clearer restriction that only the runtime libraries can not be wrapped in a
way that makes them subject to becoming GPL'd themeselves. This can be
easily accomplished with a notice specifying a separate license for the
runtime libs. IANAL, but the wording differences between the two license
versions seem to support my interpretation. 

For different reasons, I was planning to attempt a msvc71 build using your
basic build methods. My primary concern with the msvcrt80 is not license
terms, but the fact that the runtime lib installation requires adminstrative
rights to a system. Other than this, your octave package installs under the
radar of system admin, which makes this a very portable app (context USB
flash drive, other person's computer). With this compiler, rt libs just go
in system32 or in the bin directory.

I don't know how it's still available, but I got my 2003 version from
http://xona.com/2004/06/29.html and used it to successfully build python
extensions. I don't know if it's portability or license issues, but python
developers have staunchly stuck with the older complier and refuse to try to
make their dists compatiable with the latest msvc versions.

I am using your version for 200+ students this semester. The only ML work
concerns symbolic toolkit, and as soon as the Win version supports some
variant of popen and it is possible to control maxima as a subprocess, my
students will be able to use octave 100%.

Cheers,
Eric Carlson


-- 
View this message in context: 
http://www.nabble.com/MSVC-runtime-library-license-problem-tf3063320.html#a8522109
Sent from the Octave - Maintainers mailing list archive at Nabble.com.