Re: Running Octave from Fink?

[Jordi Gutiérrez Hermoso]

On 6 November 2012 11:09, Alexander Hansen <address@hidden> wrote:
> On 11/6/12 6:53 AM, Jordi Gutiérrez Hermoso wrote:

>> GNU's point of view is that we don't recommend people
>> to install non-free software. That people are already running a
>> restrictive OS is a problem, but we shouldn't be telling them to agree
>> to legalese to run Octave. Two wrongs do not make a right.
>
> I'm not saying it's "right", I'm saying "It is what it is".

It is what it is... which is wrong... It's an uncomfortable position
to face the ethical implications of one's work, and I have
unfortunately tried to make you face this one. You're doing work on
Fink, which is great, but you're also telling people to install Xcode,
which is ethically wrong, because you're implicitly and sometimes
explicitly suggesting people should agree to whatever stupid legalese
there is in Xcode. Last time Iooked at that legalese myself, there
were clauses about agreeing to being spied on by Apple and some
NDA-like clauses agreeing to not divulge what you saw. We should not
be requiring this of Octave's users.

> I was told, by someone who knows a great deal about compiling on OS X,
> that osx-gcc-installer does _not_ give a _fully_ functional build tool
> set for OS X, in that it lacks proprietary headers and the like which
> are provided by Xcode.

This seems somewhat problematic. You can't freely compile code on Mac
OS X at all? gcc cannot be freely used on that system? I cannot
believe this to be true. Is this situation really without remedy
unless we dedicate an inordinate amount of work to fix it?

I have been told that pure gcc without Xcode will not work on
Macports. Is Fink in the same situation? Would it be an inordinate
amount of work for you to simply verify if Fink can work without
Xcode?

- Jordi G. H.