From csardi at rmki.kfki.hu  Fri Apr 24 19:09:02 2009
From: csardi at rmki.kfki.hu (=?ISO-8859-1?B?R+Fib3IgQ3PhcmRp?=)
Date: Fri, 24 Apr 2009 19:09:02 +0200
Subject: [Rd] Closed-source non-free ParallelR ?
In-Reply-To: <80B0457F6F3843A49AC7EA5ABFC34CC0@gpbdmx>
References: <d70c15d40904240841u523e77d7s4ec7e45a870ee601@mail.gmail.com>
	<80B0457F6F3843A49AC7EA5ABFC34CC0@gpbdmx>
Message-ID: <d70c15d40904241009l70ee6891h1a6d8882971e1d64@mail.gmail.com>

On Fri, Apr 24, 2009 at 6:48 PM, Ian Fellows <ifellows at ucsd.edu> wrote:
>
>>Still, if they have code that is compiled and linked to R at running
>>time, then that code must be under the GPL. Again, this is the FSF
>>?interpretation and certainly not R-core's, not even mine.
>>[...]
>
> Well, not quite. R.h RDefines.h and RInternals.h are LGPL, so as long as the
> hooks go through these headers, then all is kosher is it not? Otherwise,
> what is the point of having them be LGPL?

What the point is I do not know, but I doubt that your argument would
satisfy FSF. The problem is not the "using the headers at compile
time", but the "linking against it at run time" step. AFAIK.

Gabor

> ian
>
>
>



-- 
Gabor Csardi <Gabor.Csardi at unil.ch>     UNIL DGM



[Rd] Closed-source non-free ParallelR ?
=?ISO-8859-1?B?R+Fib3IgQ3PhcmRp?=