[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Octave FAQ update about GPL
From: |
c. |
Subject: |
Re: Octave FAQ update about GPL |
Date: |
Thu, 13 Feb 2014 09:09:27 +0100 |
On 13 Feb 2014, at 08:32, Mike Miller <address@hidden> wrote:
> There is no existing text to back this conclusion up, other than the
> statement in the Octave FAQ that makes no distinction between m-files
> that call no functions and m-files that do call functions.
>
> If this is not true because the interpreted code calls GPL-licensed
> library functions distributed with Octave, then we need to clarify
> that better.
What about Octave-Forge functions?
These are distruibuted separately from Octave and can be called in m-files.
Why not ask about those too?
c.
- Octave FAQ update about GPL, fgnievinski, 2014/02/06
- Re: Octave FAQ update about GPL, Jordi GutiƩrrez Hermoso, 2014/02/06
- Re: Octave FAQ update about GPL, John W. Eaton, 2014/02/06
- Re: Octave FAQ update about GPL, fgnievinski, 2014/02/06
- Re: Octave FAQ update about GPL, fgnievinski, 2014/02/12
- Re: Octave FAQ update about GPL, fgnievinski, 2014/02/12
- Re: Octave FAQ update about GPL, Mike Miller, 2014/02/12
- Re: Octave FAQ update about GPL, fgnievinski, 2014/02/12
- Re: Octave FAQ update about GPL, Mike Miller, 2014/02/13
- Re: Octave FAQ update about GPL, Mike Miller, 2014/02/13
- Re: Octave FAQ update about GPL,
c. <=
- Re: Octave FAQ update about GPL, fgnievinski, 2014/02/13
- Re: Octave FAQ update about GPL, fgnievinski, 2014/02/13
- Re: Octave FAQ update about GPL, John W. Eaton, 2014/02/13
- Re: Octave FAQ update about GPL, Felipe G. Nievinski, 2014/02/13
- Re: Octave FAQ update about GPL, Mike Miller, 2014/02/13