Re: PDE scripts

[David Bateman]

Jordi Gutierrez Hermoso wrote:
> On 30/06/07, John W. Eaton <address@hidden> wrote:
>> On 30-Jun-2007, Jordi Gutierrez Hermoso wrote:
>>
>> | On 29/06/07, Muthiah Annamalai <address@hidden> wrote:
>> | > I remember we do not have eigs()  for several legal issues ?
>> |
>> | Really? Which?
>>
>> The ARPACK license does not seem to be compatible with the GPL.

There is nothing preventing the distribution of ARPACK. So ARPACK can be
distributed in a free software distribution, and Fedora is doing it.

There is just a silly clause in the license that requires authors of new
packages to contact the Rice University stating that they are using it.
The really stupid thing is that the apparently the e-mail address given
to allow these e-mail is so flooded with SPAM that none of the authors
of ARPACK read it.. So an e-mail to the required address is an e-mail
into a black-hole..

Sorenson, the principal author of ARPACK, seemed willing to change the
license but was concerned that he'd have to deal with Rice Universities
lawyers to do it. It was their lawyers who originally required this
clause... Everything else in the license is fully GPL compatiable..

> 
> So we'd have to implement our own eigs, then?

Check the nonfree/arpack package of octave-forge..

> 
> Hm. Maybe I should check out the library's Golub & Van Loan again.
> 
> - Jordi G. H.