www-legal-discuss mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Santiago Gala <santiago.g...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: Clarification on the release requirements
Date Tue, 28 Apr 2009 17:46:35 GMT
El mar, 28-04-2009 a las 09:28 -0700, David Jencks escribió:

(... lots of discussions that I don't want to enter to discuss ...)

Strictly my opinion:

> For a C project, does a source distro have to include make files?  If  

Yes (for Makefiles).

> so, why doesn'ti it have to include make and the compiler as well?   

It doesn't. Because, while the Makefile has a certain amount of "source"
in it. i.e., a Makefile is a creative expression on project
dependencies, relations between modules, and rules to build the project
artifacts.

OTOH, make and the compiler are part of the so-called "system
dependencies" and include no creative expression at all related to our
project, but only about transforming a language source code into a
platform machine code, which everybody agrees is in a different plane.

> I'm no C expert but I believe it's possible although  perhaps  
> impractical to build a project using just the compiler...
> 

My opinion is relative to what common software engineering practices
regard as "source distributions". The typical criteria is:
something you can "./configure && make && make test && sudo make
install" to deploy. There might be slight differences in build systems,
but all are variations of the above.

In fact, a number of FLOSS projects will not compile or run easily
without the original Makefile info, as they need specific compiler flags
to avoid bugs in certain compilers breaking the compilation.

> thanks
> david jencks

Regards
Santiago


---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: legal-discuss-unsubscribe@apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: legal-discuss-help@apache.org


Mime
View raw message