Re: binary versions of functions

[Stefan van der Walt]

On Fri, Oct 15, 2004 at 09:59:23AM +0200, Michael Creel wrote:
> > > Turning your code into a C++ extension doesn't help.  Even assuming the
> > > m-file to C++ translators were far enough along for your purpose, the
> > > GPL requires that you distribute the source for any oct-file that you
> > > supply.
> >
> 
> Is this really true? The simple act of distributing an oct file compiled 
> using 
> using mkoctfile means that the source code must be GPL'ed? Or any binary 
> compiled with gcc and distributed means the source must be GPL'ed? Or is the 
> issue what is #include -ed?
> M.

When you make an oct-file, you link to liboctave, which is GPL.  That
implies that your code has to be, too.

Regards
Stefan



-------------------------------------------------------------
Octave is freely available under the terms of the GNU GPL.

Octave's home on the web:  http://www.octave.org
How to fund new projects:  http://www.octave.org/funding.html
Subscription information:  http://www.octave.org/archive.html
-------------------------------------------------------------