[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: proposed FAQ entries about licensing
From: |
John W. Eaton |
Subject: |
Re: proposed FAQ entries about licensing |
Date: |
Wed, 8 Apr 2009 18:20:48 -0400 |
On 8-Apr-2009, Judd Storrs wrote:
| To follow up and maybe clarify. If you were to compile the mex file
| using Matlab instead of octave, the resulting binaries would not
| contain links to liboctave or any other part of octave. They would use
| Matlab's mex.h in this case. So distribution of the compiled binaries
| would not depend on octave's license at all.
Correct, and they would also not work with Octave by default, because
I think they would be linked (probably unnecessarily) with some
Matlab-specific libraries.
jwe
- Re: proposed FAQ entries about licensing, (continued)
- Re: proposed FAQ entries about licensing, Jaroslav Hajek, 2009/04/09
- Re: proposed FAQ entries about licensing, Judd Storrs, 2009/04/09
- Re: proposed FAQ entries about licensing, Judd Storrs, 2009/04/09
- Re: proposed FAQ entries about licensing, John W. Eaton, 2009/04/20
- Re: proposed FAQ entries about licensing, Judd Storrs, 2009/04/20
- Re: proposed FAQ entries about licensing, John W. Eaton, 2009/04/21
- Re: proposed FAQ entries about licensing, David Bateman, 2009/04/21
- Re: proposed FAQ entries about licensing, Judd Storrs, 2009/04/21
- Re: proposed FAQ entries about licensing, David Bateman, 2009/04/08
- Re: proposed FAQ entries about licensing, Judd Storrs, 2009/04/08
- Re: proposed FAQ entries about licensing,
John W. Eaton <=
- Re: proposed FAQ entries about licensing, John W. Eaton, 2009/04/08
Re: proposed FAQ entries about licensing, Judd Storrs, 2009/04/07
Re: proposed FAQ entries about licensing, John W. Eaton, 2009/04/08
Re: proposed FAQ entries about licensing, Judd Storrs, 2009/04/08