Menu
▾
▴
gnuplot-beta
|
From: Johannes Z. <joh...@ze...> - 2004-06-02 08:34:23
|
Hello,
Debian's gnuplot comes w/o gnu readline, which is very bad in my
opinion. The reason is a license problem, which is documented by the
package maintainer Thimo Neubauer <th...@de...> (in
/usr/share/doc/gnuplot/README.Debian):
libreadline
-----------
Yes, the built in readline of gnuplot is bad. However, libreadline
cannot be used instead because it is licensed under the GPL, whereas
gnuplot has special licenses (patches only). Linking those programs
together is forbidden by the GPL. Please don't file bugs telling me to
use libreadline in gnuplot...
Is there a chance to get the license changed, so that debian can ship
gnuplot with the gnu readline?
--
Johannes
|
|
From: Lars H. <lhe...@us...> - 2004-06-02 08:51:37
|
Johannes Zellner writes: > Hello, Johannes! Where have you been all the time? Good to hear from you :) [...] > Is there a chance to get the license changed, so that debian can ship > gnuplot with the gnu readline? The gnuplot license? Not much of a chance. However, I think this could work if readline was distributed under the LGPL instead of GPL. Caveat: IANAL. |
|
From: Johannes Z. <joh...@ze...> - 2004-06-02 09:33:55
|
On Wed, Jun 02, 2004 at 09:51:29AM +0100, Lars Hecking wrote: > Johannes Zellner writes: > > Hello, > > Johannes! Where have you been all the time? Good to hear from you :) hehe. I've a real job, a wife and yet a child is on it's way. Priorities have shifted ... > [...] > > Is there a chance to get the license changed, so that debian can ship > > gnuplot with the gnu readline? > > The gnuplot license? Not much of a chance. However, I think this could > work if readline was distributed under the LGPL instead of GPL. hmm. I guess they won't change the readline license. What about dlopen'ing libreadline after gnuplot starts, would that solve the license problems? -- Johannes Women are probably the main cause of free software starvation. |
|
From: Thimo N. <th...@de...> - 2004-06-02 13:50:15
|
On Wed, Jun 02, 2004 at 11:33:50AM +0200, Johannes Zellner wrote: > hmm. I guess they won't change the readline license. What about > dlopen'ing libreadline after gnuplot starts, would that solve the > license problems? No. Otherwise all licenses would be quite pointless on any system with shared libs :) Cheers Thimo |
|
From: Petr M. <mi...@ph...> - 2004-06-02 09:04:20
|
> Debian's gnuplot comes w/o gnu readline, which is very bad in my > opinion. The reason is a license problem, which is documented by the > package maintainer Thimo Neubauer <th...@de...> (in > /usr/share/doc/gnuplot/README.Debian): Solution to this problem is to implement <TAB>-expansion of filenames in gnuplot's readline library. There was some discussion about it few years ago, but nobody did it. TAB is the only difference, I guess? -- PM |
|
From: Arnd B. <arn...@we...> - 2004-06-02 09:31:09
|
On Wed, 2 Jun 2004, Petr Mikulik wrote: > > Debian's gnuplot comes w/o gnu readline, which is very bad in my > > opinion. The reason is a license problem, which is documented by the > > package maintainer Thimo Neubauer <th...@de...> (in > > /usr/share/doc/gnuplot/README.Debian): > > Solution to this problem is to implement <TAB>-expansion of filenames in > gnuplot's readline library. There was some discussion about it few years > ago, but nobody did it. > TAB is the only difference, I guess? Long lines don't work either: i.e., for a line longer than the width of the terminal window you cannot get to the very beginning of that line. (this is with debian testing, gnuplot Version 3.8k patchlevel 1, debian unstable offers 4.0) This is also filed as bug under http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=75403 There Thimo Neubauer also wrote """ I've already proposed to the upstream authors to use libeditline which is at least better than the internal commandline-stuff and is licensed under BSD-license. However my patches weren't accepted yet... """ From the README of libeditline: """ This is a line-editing library. It can be linked into almost any program to provide command-line editing and recall. It is call-compatible with the FSF readline library, but it is a fraction of the size (and offers fewer features). It does not use standard I/O. It is distributed under a "C News-like" copyright. """ (I downloaded that from http://packages.debian.org/testing/source/editline) Best, Arnd |
|
From: Johannes Z. <joh...@ze...> - 2004-06-02 09:35:49
|
On Wed, Jun 02, 2004 at 11:04:17AM +0200, Petr Mikulik wrote: > > Debian's gnuplot comes w/o gnu readline, which is very bad in my > > opinion. The reason is a license problem, which is documented by the > > package maintainer Thimo Neubauer <th...@de...> (in > > /usr/share/doc/gnuplot/README.Debian): > > Solution to this problem is to implement <TAB>-expansion of filenames in > gnuplot's readline library. There was some discussion about it few years > ago, but nobody did it. > TAB is the only difference, I guess? no. all the history goodies are missing, e.g. searching backwards in the history by <ctrl-r> ... I guess we'd have to rewrite libreadline. -- Johannes |
|
From: Hans-Bernhard B. <br...@ph...> - 2004-06-02 11:30:28
|
On Wed, 2 Jun 2004, Johannes Zellner wrote: > Debian's gnuplot comes w/o gnu readline, which is very bad in my > opinion. As a matter of fact, *all* binary distributions of gnuplot would have to come without GNU readline compiled in. Otherwise, they'ld be in violation of the GPL. I've seen mention of a program called 'rlwrap' (or similar) solving this by a wrapper layer utilizing GNU readline, to go between non-GPL programs like gnuplot and the console. Maybe Thimo can package gnuplot to use that. > Is there a chance to get the license changed, so that debian can ship > gnuplot with the gnu readline? Essentially: no. Neither side of this conflict appears willing to bugde. That has been tried in the past, but never succeeded. Which leaves us with essentially two ways to proceed: 1) use libeditline, the LGPL alternative to libreadline 2) extend our own readline.c considerably I have my doubts that 2) is feasible. So: has any of us given libeditline a try? If so, please speak up with some results. If not, someone should do that soon. -- Hans-Bernhard Broeker (br...@ph...) Even if all the snow were burnt, ashes would remain. |
|
From: Thimo N. <th...@de...> - 2004-06-02 13:44:15
|
On Wed, Jun 02, 2004 at 01:30:22PM +0200, Hans-Bernhard Broeker wrote: > Which leaves us with essentially two ways to proceed: > > 1) use libeditline, the LGPL alternative to libreadline > 2) extend our own readline.c considerably > > I have my doubts that 2) is feasible. So: has any of us given libeditline > a try? If so, please speak up with some results. If not, someone should > do that soon. I've tested libeditline quite some while ago, but it wasn't really usable then: deleting a character with backspace printed a new line, scrolling the rest up... However, changing gnuplot to use the lib was easy, I posted a patch back then. Maybe I'll give libeditline a try next weekend and tell you about the new results. Cheers Thimo |
|
From: Ethan M. <merritt@u.washington.edu> - 2004-06-02 17:55:37
|
I do not believe that the GPL restricts gnuplot from being linked against libreadline. Debian apparently believes otherwise, but that is their problem, not ours. I don't think we should waste any time over it. Debian are waaaay out there on the extreme of licensing paranoia. 1) gnuplot is clearly not a derived work of libreadline. I don't think anyone is arguing this point. 2) It is my understanding that restrictions imposed by the GPL do not cross a well-defined API boundary. Therefore mere linkage to an independent (and optional) shared library does not by itself contravene the GPL. The most extensive discussion on this issue that I have followed has been on the linux kernel mailing list. So far the broad (though not universal) consensus is that non-GPL binaries can link against the GPL linux kernel. This is a much tighter integration than our case of using libreadline as an optional adjunct to a software package (gnuplot) that runs just fine even on platforms where libreadline does not exist. These arguments may well not sway Debian, who are (IMHO) way over the top with regard to interpreting the GPL. But I do not see that Debian's own policies, which are not widely shared even by other linux distibutions, should control our actions for gnuplot. Note that Fedora Core, Redhat, PLD, Mandrake, and SuSE all seem perfectly happy distributing gnuplot+libreadline binary packages. On Wednesday 02 June 2004 01:34 am, Johannes Zellner wrote: > Debian's gnuplot comes w/o gnu readline, which is very bad in my > opinion. The reason is a license problem, which is documented by the > package maintainer Thimo Neubauer <th...@de...> (in > /usr/share/doc/gnuplot/README.Debian): > > libreadline > ----------- > > Yes, the built in readline of gnuplot is bad. However, libreadline > cannot be used instead because it is licensed under the GPL, whereas > gnuplot has special licenses (patches only). Linking those programs > together is forbidden by the GPL. Please don't file bugs telling me > to use libreadline in gnuplot... -- Ethan A Merritt merritt@u.washington.edu Biomolecular Structure Center Mailstop 357742 University of Washington, Seattle, WA 98195 |
×
Want the latest updates on software, tech news, and AI?
Get latest updates about software, tech news, and AI from SourceForge directly in your inbox once a month.
Thanks for helping keep SourceForge clean.
X