Re: GPLv3

[Thomas Weber]

Am Freitag, den 14.09.2007, 03:06 -0400 schrieb John W. Eaton:
> On 13-Sep-2007, Quentin Spencer wrote:

> | lapack-devel (public domain)
> | blas-devel (public domain)
> 
> Yes, I think that these are essentially OK for any purpose, but we
> also use ATLAS, which has a different license, and like zlib and
> ncurses, I haven't looked at it closely enough to know for sure
> whether it is GPLv3 compatible, but I think it is.

Is this actually a problem? I mean, Octave uses the LAPACK and BLAS
interfaces. They can be provided by ATLAS, but for example in Debian the
packages installed during build are the public domain packages.
 

> | suitesparse-devel (bsd-like ?)
> 
> SuiteSparse appears to be distributed under the terms of LGPLv2.1
> only, and not "any later version".  

I just looked trough the differenent License files in suitesparse and
they all seem to be GPL or LGPL, but all with "or any later
version"-option. 

        Thomas