Dear Francesco Poli What is the state of this bug ? any progress with respect to scotch licensing ?
this is a really painful situation ! are petsc and all libraries (based on umfpack) related to this bug issues marked for removal from testing ? have you marked also octave with an RC bug ? it uses suitesparse/umfpack and scotch [1] Basically all libraries/programs using suitesparse/umfpack should have this bug, no ? I think Libreoffice/Openoffice are using suitesparse(and scotch) and glpk so it should also have the RC bug. I guess that the technical solution would be to get rid of umfpack but then that would disrupt a lot of software ! 1. http://packages.qa.debian.org/o/octave.html Best regards C. On Tue, Mar 11, 2014 at 12:05 AM, Francesco Poli (wintermute) < invernom...@paranoici.org> wrote: > Package: libfeel++1 > Version: 1:0.95.0-final-2 > Severity: serious > Justification: Policy 2.3 > User: debian-science-maintain...@lists.alioth.debian.org > Usertags: scotch-license-issues > > Hello, > the library /usr/lib/libfeelpp.so.1.0.0 links with: > > => libumfpack.so.5.6.2, which is under the GNU GPL v2 or later > > => libcholmod.so.2.1.2, which has parts under the GNU GPL v2 or later > > => libptscotch-5.1.so and libptscotcherr-5.1.so, which are released > under the GPL-incompatible terms of the CeCILL-C v1.0 license > > => libpetsc.so.3.4.2 and libslepc.so.3.4.2, which, though not being > under strong copyleft or under copyleft at all, link, in their > turn, with the above three libraries... > > => libglpk.so.36, which is under the GNU GPL v3 or later > > => libgmsh.so.2, which is under the GNU GPL v2 or later (with some > exceptions, but not regarding SCOTCH or CeCILL-C) > > This seems to mean that package libfeel++1 includes a file which > links with both GPL-licensed and GPL-incompatible libraries. > > Please refer to the similar bug #740463 for some further details about > the SCOTCH licensing issues. > > I have also noticed that package feel++-apps includes several files > which link with the above mentioned combination of libraries. > > I think the possible solutions to the issue for feel++ are, in > descending order of desirability: > > (A) SCOTCH copyright holders should be contacted and persuaded to > re-license (or dual-license) it under GPLv2-or-later-compatible terms > > (B) SCOTCH should be substituted with a GPLv2-or-later-compatible > replacement, if any is available (METIS seems to be at least > GPLv3-or-later-compatible, see https://bugs.debian.org/740463#15 ) > > (C) GPL-licensed library (such as UMFPACK and CHOLMOD, GLPK, Gmsh) > copyright holders should be asked to relax the copyleft (for instance > by switching to the LGPL v2.1) or add license exceptions that give > permission to link their works with code released under CeCILL-C v1.0 > > > As said in other bug reports, the best solution is (A): > I am thus renewing my call for help to push in the direction of > {re|dual}-licensing SCOTCH under the GNU LGPL v2.1: > please see https://bugs.debian.org/740463#5 for the full story. > > Thanks for your time! > > To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an > email to feelpp-devel+unsubscr...@feelpp.org. > -- Professor in Scientific Computing IRMA, CeMoSiS, AMIES IRMA: http://www-irma.u-strasbg.fr/~prudhomm CeMoSis: http://www.cemosis.fr AMIES: http://www.agence-maths-entreprises.fr/ Téléphone : 03 68 85 0089 - Bureau : P-210 Mobile: 06 87 64 60 51
