On Mon, Oct 05, 1998 at 04:09:46PM -0400, Peter S Galbraith wrote:
> > ``As a special exception the software may be distributed linked against the
> > libforms library without including the source of the libforms library even
> > though the GPL would normally bar this, as long as the requirements o
Gregory S. Stark wrote:
>
> John Lapeyre <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > This a kind of interesting looking package. It is GPL'd but
> > depends on a no-source-available library. I just reread the relevant
> > portions of the GPL, but I'm no Talmudic scholar.
> > Can the GPL be pr
On Sun, Oct 04, 1998 at 11:29:51PM -0700, John Lapeyre wrote:
> Its funny, I read on slashdot that fltk is going non-free, but
> there is a September 23 release which is still under the GPL .
Bill Spitnak won't be working on it anymore because Digital Domain (his
employer) won't allow him t
On 4 Oct 1998, Gregory S. Stark wrote:
gsstar>a fltk package based on the last stable release (i think) of it before
it went
gsstar>non-free. It's a nice lightweight LGPL'd toolkit which is nearly drop-in
gsstar>compatible with libforms.
According to http://fltk.easysw.com/ , you did ge
On 4 Oct 1998, Gregory S. Stark wrote:
gsstar>However, a better solution would be to try compiling it against fltk. We
have
gsstar>a fltk package based on the last stable release (i think) of it before
it went
gsstar>non-free. It's a nice lightweight LGPL'd toolkit which is nearly drop-in
gsstar
John Lapeyre <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> This a kind of interesting looking package. It is GPL'd but
> depends on a no-source-available library. I just reread the relevant
> portions of the GPL, but I'm no Talmudic scholar.
> Can the GPL be properly applied to this ?
>
> http:/
This a kind of interesting looking package. It is GPL'd but
depends on a no-source-available library. I just reread the relevant
portions of the GPL, but I'm no Talmudic scholar.
Can the GPL be properly applied to this ?
http://ifb.bv.tu-berlin.de/JOCHEN/XSTAB/xstab.html
Jo
7 matches
Mail list logo
