English version
Accueil     À propos     Téléchargement     Ressources     Contactez-nous    

Ce site est rarement mis à jour. Pour les informations les plus récentes, rendez-vous sur le nouveau site OCaml à l'adresse ocaml.org.

Browse thread
[Caml-list] Announcing the OMake build system version 0.9.1
[ Home ] [ Index: by date | by threads ]
[ Search: ]

[ Message by date: previous | next ] [ Message in thread: previous | next ] [ Thread: previous | next ]
Date: 2004-09-06 (00:33)
From: Aleksey Nogin <nogin@c...>
Subject: Re: [Omake] Re: [Caml-list] Announcing the OMake build system version 0.9.1
On 05.09.2004 17:12, james woodyatt wrote:

> I want to be able to extend the functions so that my build system knows 
> how to use more toolchains than just C and Ocaml, and I want those 
> extensions to be bundled with my non-GPL code.  If I were to use Omake, 
> then I expect my code would link to the functions in the Omake 
> distribution, and I would then be in violation of the GPL if I didn't 
> use a GPL-compatible license for my distribution.

There is no "linking" involved when you use the built-in rules of omake. 
The way it looks is that in your own OMakeroot file you will have 
something like:

# Include the standard configuration
include $(STDROOT)

(although I do not really know what would be considered "linking" in a 
case of an interpreted language).

As I mentioned in an earlier post, the "built-in" support of C, OCaml, 
LaTeX, etc is not some built-in magic - there is just a "global" omake 
file that is included in the distribution that defines a number of 
default rules, using the same syntax that you would use in your own 

The situation is identical to having a big make file with a lot of 
useful rules and you just adding
include /usr/local/lib/make/UsefulMakeFile
to the Makefile in your project. Doing something like that would in no 
way require modifying make itself in any way.

I would guess there would be nothing wrong with using a liberal license 
(BSD or like) on this "global omake file", in order to allow users to 
borrow pieces of it and freely modify them as needed, while the main 
omake engine would still stay GPL... Do people feel that a license 
change of this sort would be helpful?

Aleksey Nogin

Home Page: http://nogin.org/
E-Mail: nogin@cs.caltech.edu (office), aleksey@nogin.org (personal)
Office: Jorgensen 70, tel: (626) 395-2907

To unsubscribe, mail caml-list-request@inria.fr Archives: http://caml.inria.fr
Bug reports: http://caml.inria.fr/bin/caml-bugs FAQ: http://caml.inria.fr/FAQ/
Beginner's list: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/ocaml_beginners