Re: [OctDev] No symbolic package in future (Windows/VC++) releases

[Michael Goffioul]

On Mon, Apr 20, 2009 at 10:51 PM, Judd Storrs <address@hidden> wrote:
> On Mon, Apr 20, 2009 at 5:04 PM, John W. Eaton <address@hidden> wrote:
>>
>> Does the FAQ answer specifically say that you are not allowed to
>> distribute them together?
>
> GPLv2 section 3 does:
>
> "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."
>
> The question is whether being part of the same installer counts as
> "accompanies the executable". GPLv3 may be more lenient. The best I could
> find as equivalent is at the end of section 6:
>
> "A separable portion of the object code, whose source code is excluded
> from the Corresponding Source as a System Library, need not be
> included in conveying the object code work."
>
> It seems to me that the GPLv3's "need not" is much more permissive than the
> GPLv2's ban on co-distribution.

Just for the record, looking at the answer here

http://www.ginac.de/pipermail/cln-list/2009-April/000513.html

this guy won't stop at GiNaC/CLN. And he claims this is still
valid for GPLv3.

Michael.