Hi Nicolás,
Thanks for the suggestion. I'm first consulting an independent legal
expert on these questions. But I will probably double-check that
expert's response as you suggest.
Cheers,
Bruce
On 8/18/09 2:34 AM, Nicolás Alvarez wrote:
> El Lunes 17 Ago 2009 20:56:27 Eric J Korpela escribió:
>> 2) Is IMKL or ACML covered by the GPL v2 clause "However, as a
>> special exception, the source code distributed need not include
>> anything that is normally distributed (in either source or binary
>> form) with the major components (compiler, kernel, and so on) of the
>> operating system on which the executable runs, unless that component
>> itself accompanies the executable." or the GPL v3 clause I posted
>> earlier (if the license is "v2 or later")?
>>
>> If the Intel compiler is required in order to use IMKL and an AMD
>> compiler is required to use ACML, you could probably make the claim
>> that it is allowed, especially if those libraries are included by
>> default in any builds with that compiler. If you can link to these
>> libraries using a stock GCC or Visual-C++ compiler, then that claim
>> gets more difficult to make.
>
> For this point, I think you should ask <licensing at fsf dot org>.
_______________________________________________
boinc_dev mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.ssl.berkeley.edu/mailman/listinfo/boinc_dev
To unsubscribe, visit the above URL and
(near bottom of page) enter your email address.
