[Savannah-register-public] [task #14249] Submission of GetFEM

[Yves Renard]

Follow-up Comment #9, task #14249 (project administration):

Concerning LGPL v3+ and GCC runtime exception, some of our users who need to
link GetFEM statically and redistribute it as a closed software are nor in
favour of a pure LGLv3+ license. I ask to FSF GPL Compliance Lab Office as you
suggested but have no answer yet.


Concerning the Blas file, whe do not have exactly the same interpretation. The
LGPL requires the source code to be provided in order to satisfy freedom #1
(study, understand, adapt the source code). In this case BLAS.c is equivalent
to BLAS.f in terms of providing all these possibilities. The conversion
between BLAS.f and BLAS.c is not a conversion from source code to object code,
or even between source codes at different abstraction levels. Both BLAS.f and
BLAS.c are equally readable, understandable and editable in the spirit of
freedom #1. A better interpretation is possibly that BLAS.c is a derivative
work of BLAS.f distributed under the same conditions as the original.

However, if you think this is not the case, we of course may include a compy
of BLAS.f sources in a sub-directory


    _______________________________________________________

Reply to this item at:

  <http://savannah.gnu.org/task/?14249>

_______________________________________________
  Message sent via/by Savannah
  http://savannah.gnu.org/