On Wed, May 02, 2018 at 10:03:38AM -0500, Dirk Eddelbuettel wrote: > > On 2 May 2018 at 14:41, Lumin wrote: > | Seems that things are getting more complicated. Recall that here we'are > | going to prevent users from GPL violation in situations such as this > | one: > | > | debootstrap; apt install libmkl-rt; apt install octave; octave ... (1) > > Are you sure? I do not think that is correct. Downloading and installating > MKL, and running it with R or Octave (or any other package linking the BLAS > interface) does not constitute a GPL violation AFAIK.
Not sure. I admit that I'm not good at long licences such as GPL. Whether it violates GPL or not, what we do in config/postinst won't change: make sure it's the user's explicit choice to use MKL as the default BLAS/LAPACK implementation, and in contrast, MKL will not be used without the explicit choice. > (There may well be limitations on further redistribution of the aggregate > even though even the MKL now limits redistribution as it is of course still a > no-source-code piece of software.) Intel's ISSL license allows redistribution, as long as no file is changed. > Thanks for all your work on this though. Much appreciated. > > Dirk > > -- > http://dirk.eddelbuettel.com | @eddelbuettel | e...@debian.org
