Re: Performance issues on Windows, suggests a MSVC build

[Michael Goffioul]

On Wed, Jun 22, 2011 at 8:14 PM, John W. Eaton <address@hidden> wrote:
> OK, but from reading the FAQ entry, we are apparently allowed to
> distribute Octave compiled with MSVC and linked with MSVC runtime
> libraries.  We just can't distribute the runtime library along with
> Octave.  As I recall, you objected to that on technical grounds
> because it would be somewhat silly and inconvenient, and many (if not
> most) users would probably encounter problems.  I might also object on
> the grounds that it is an instance of telling the user to perform the
> link to a proprietary library, and for other cases we argue that doing
> that is no way to sidestep the terms of the GPL, so it will be
> confusing if we allow it in this case but not others.  The difference
> is that the MSVC runtime library is considered a "System Component"
> and so gets special treatment, but it will likely still cause some
> confusion.

I'm not willing to discuss the GPL, but I failed (and still fail) to see
the benefit for the end user of being allowed to link to a library, but
not to bundle it.

> And for me, there is also the issue of wanting to promote
> free software, not proprietary software.

My goal was to increase octave's user base. Maybe I'm wrong, but
I'm convinced that the pair Window+MSVC is probably one of the
most popular combination in industry. Nevertheless, I understand
your position.

Michael.