* Licensing issue with Gmsh?
@ 2020-10-02 8:07 zimoun
2020-10-02 12:28 ` zimoun
0 siblings, 1 reply; 6+ messages in thread
From: zimoun @ 2020-10-02 8:07 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Guix Devel
Dear,
I am updating the package gmsh. Currently, the part ’contrib/metis’ is
removed with the comment “non-free METIS code”:
--8<---------------cut here---------------start------------->8---
(snippet
;; Remove non-free METIS code
'(begin
(delete-file-recursively "contrib/metis")
#t))))
--8<---------------cut here---------------end--------------->8---
However, METIS is licensed Apache v2.0 and note that there is one
package ’metis’ (“guix show metis”) but it cannot be used, anyway.
The code is here:
<https://gitlab.onelab.info/gmsh/gmsh/-/tree/master/contrib/metis>
What is wrong with the licensing? Only the header of files?
Note that Debian compiles it with METIS:
<https://salsa.debian.org/science-team/gmsh/-/blob/master/debian/rules#L37>
Nnot checked with other distributions.)
I am inclined to enable METIS because it appears to me fine. However,
since freedom is essential, it would like another advice and/or comment
on.
Thank you in advance.
All the best,
simon
ps:
I discussed this point upstream:
<https://gitlab.onelab.info/gmsh/gmsh/-/issues/1013>
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
* Re: Licensing issue with Gmsh?
2020-10-02 8:07 zimoun
@ 2020-10-02 12:28 ` zimoun
0 siblings, 0 replies; 6+ messages in thread
From: zimoun @ 2020-10-02 12:28 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Guix Devel
Dear,
On Fri, 2 Oct 2020 at 10:07, zimoun <zimon.toutoune@gmail.com> wrote:
> --8<---------------cut here---------------start------------->8---
> (snippet
> ;; Remove non-free METIS code
> '(begin
> (delete-file-recursively "contrib/metis")
> #t))))
> --8<---------------cut here---------------end--------------->8---
[...]
> I am inclined to enable METIS because it appears to me fine. However,
> since freedom is essential, it would like another advice and/or comment
> on.
Gmsh had updated from METIS 4 (non-free) to METIS 5 (free) in commit
eaff7f6477fe876991615cfa4b5832bd5f12994b.
<https://gitlab.onelab.info/gmsh/gmsh/-/commit/eaff7f6477fe876991615cfa4b5832bd5f12994b>
The current Gmsh version 2.16.0 had been released on the Jan. 3rd and
the commit updating METIS 4->5 on the Sept., 19th.
All the best,
simon
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
* Re: Licensing issue with Gmsh?
@ 2020-10-02 16:26 Paul Garlick
2020-10-02 17:35 ` zimoun
0 siblings, 1 reply; 6+ messages in thread
From: Paul Garlick @ 2020-10-02 16:26 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: guix-devel
Hi Simon,
Thank you for working on the Gmsh package. There have been a great
many changes since the last update.
> I am inclined to enable METIS because it appears to me
fine. However,
> since freedom is essential, it would like another advice and/or
comment
> on.
There is a distinction between METIS (free) and ParMETIS (non-free)
which may have influenced the decision to remove the whole metis
directory. As far as I can see Gmsh does not use any files from the
ParMETIS library.
There is only a parmetis.c file included in the metis directory.
However, it is commented out in CMakeLists.txt.
Best regards,
Paul.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
* Re: Licensing issue with Gmsh?
2020-10-02 16:26 Licensing issue with Gmsh? Paul Garlick
@ 2020-10-02 17:35 ` zimoun
2020-10-02 21:59 ` Paul Garlick
0 siblings, 1 reply; 6+ messages in thread
From: zimoun @ 2020-10-02 17:35 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Paul Garlick; +Cc: Guix Devel
Dear Paul,
On Fri, 2 Oct 2020 at 18:26, Paul Garlick
<pgarlick@tourbillion-technology.com> wrote:
> Thank you for working on the Gmsh package. There have been a great
> many changes since the last update.
Yeah, the Christophe's talk at last FOSDEM was exciting about the new
features in 4.x. ;-)
And since the Guix v1.2 is in the pipe...
> There is a distinction between METIS (free) and ParMETIS (non-free)
> which may have influenced the decision to remove the whole metis
> directory. As far as I can see Gmsh does not use any files from the
> ParMETIS library.
That's what Christophe (Geuzaine) told me. Cool!
> There is only a parmetis.c file included in the metis directory.
> However, it is commented out in CMakeLists.txt.
Here [1] the patch updating Gmsh. Well, I missed this file (the base
code changed a lot since last time I was playing with; ~2012-2016),
thank you for explaining.
To be "Guix compliant", this parametis.c file should be removed, right?
[1] <http://issues.guix.gnu.org/issue/43761>
All the best,
simon
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
* Re: Licensing issue with Gmsh?
2020-10-02 17:35 ` zimoun
@ 2020-10-02 21:59 ` Paul Garlick
2020-10-02 23:49 ` zimoun
0 siblings, 1 reply; 6+ messages in thread
From: Paul Garlick @ 2020-10-02 21:59 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: zimoun; +Cc: Guix Devel
Hi Simon,
> There is only a parmetis.c file included in the metis directory.
> However, it is commented out in CMakeLists.txt.
> To be "Guix compliant", this parametis.c file should be removed,
> right?
The file is part of METIS and thereby covered by the Apache license.
It only provides entry points for ParMETIS, so ignoring it in the build
stage, in the way that Gmsh does, seems to be appropriate.
However, I notice from the patch that the Guix package metis is
included as an input. This means that the whole of the bundled
'contrib/metis' directory could be deleted after all. If I remember
correctly CMake gives preference to the 'system' packages ahead of the
bundled packages.
Best regards,
Paul.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
* Re: Licensing issue with Gmsh?
2020-10-02 21:59 ` Paul Garlick
@ 2020-10-02 23:49 ` zimoun
0 siblings, 0 replies; 6+ messages in thread
From: zimoun @ 2020-10-02 23:49 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Paul Garlick; +Cc: Guix Devel
Hi Paul,
Thank you for the review.
On Fri, 2 Oct 2020 at 23:59, Paul Garlick
<pgarlick@tourbillion-technology.com> wrote:
> The file is part of METIS and thereby covered by the Apache license.
> It only provides entry points for ParMETIS, so ignoring it in the build
> stage, in the way that Gmsh does, seems to be appropriate.
Fine.
> However, I notice from the patch that the Guix package metis is
> included as an input. This means that the whole of the bundled
> 'contrib/metis' directory could be deleted after all. If I remember
> correctly CMake gives preference to the 'system' packages ahead of the
> bundled packages.
Sorry, today was a bad day and I failed in multi-tasking.
Well, I have tried to use the Guix package 'metis' instead of the
bundled one -- without success about the test suite. Then when
sending the patch, I missed the remove (my personal unsafe-threading
;-)). So the package v2 fixes that. But the '(modules ...)' is not
necessary anymore.
All in all, the patch v3 is the good one. Sorry for the mess.
<http://issues.guix.gnu.org/43761#3>
All the best,
simon
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2020-10-02 23:49 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 6+ messages (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed)
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2020-10-02 16:26 Licensing issue with Gmsh? Paul Garlick
2020-10-02 17:35 ` zimoun
2020-10-02 21:59 ` Paul Garlick
2020-10-02 23:49 ` zimoun
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2020-10-02 8:07 zimoun
2020-10-02 12:28 ` zimoun
Code repositories for project(s) associated with this public inbox
https://git.savannah.gnu.org/cgit/guix.git
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).