Re: The problem with gnuplot
On Tue, 2005-08-16 at 12:38, Michael Banck wrote:
> On Mon, Aug 15, 2005 at 09:58:28PM +0200, Thomas Walter wrote:
> > Where is a copyright break when I install from source using configure
> > options of my best choice, in this case for example 'libreadline' and
> > its best friend 'libhistory'.
> There is no copyright break, unless you distribute those binaries. You
> can use them for your own needs, no problem.
Good to know for the end-user.
With respect to the example described by Justin Pryzby -- several
end-users on one machine -- is this covered too? Until this point,
there is no distribution. There was the decision to install the
software for end-usage with these features.
I guess getting here more light by a lawer would help some teams.
Also some words about the situation when using "computer-farms".
> > By the way, from my point of view: For software in this categorie
> > (science, heavy math oriented) it is best to install always from
> > source to profit from best optimizations for underlying hardware. F.e.
> > just think about 'atlas' and 'fftw'.
> gnuplot does not really benefit from highly optimized atlas libraries,
> neither do most other applications. There are optimized atlas libraries
> around for various CPU types, so I do not think your assertion that it
> is best to install from source holds in general. It might be
> advantegeous in some corner cases, of course.
Yes you are correct. It was an example only and to hit 2 birds with one
stone for science software of this kind and where it makes sense to
spent this effort.