On 06/23/10 02:35 AM, William Stein wrote:
On Tue, Jun 22, 2010 at 6:33 PM, Dr. David Kirkby
<david.kir...@onetel.net> wrote:
There seems to be an agreement to include GLPK, but as I noted elsewhere,
the package does not build properly on 64-bit Solaris, as the right compiler
flag (-m64) does not get added. Robert created a ticket for this.
Thanks so much for looking into this.
http://trac.sagemath.org/sage_trac/ticket/9312
The spkg-install and SPKG.txt are a bit odd, so I'm trying to sort them out.
SPKG.txt says:
---------------------------------------------------------
== License ==
The GLPK package is part of the GNU project, released under the aegis of
GNU.
----------------------------------------------------------
but src/COPYING is clearly GPL 3
GNU GENERAL PUBLIC LICENSE
Version 3, 29 June 2007
Are GPL3 packages allowed as standard, rather than just optional? I thought
there were a no-no.
Yes, they are allowed. We already ship *many* GPL3 standard packages.
What is not permitted to be GPL 3 then? I thought it was a no-no at one point in
time.
It seems to be a losing battle, as more and more packages get released, they
will be GPL 3. I noticed the other day that trying to run autoconf/automake on
some code without a "COPYING" file, it automatically puts a file called COPYING
which is GPL 3.
Dave
--
To post to this group, send an email to sage-devel@googlegroups.com
To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to
sage-devel+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/sage-devel
URL: http://www.sagemath.org
