teqc builds very old?

Mike Rost rost at unavco.org
Wed Sep 18 16:06:47 UTC 2019


Hi Doug, there isn't a simple answer to your question.

Yes it is possible to drop native receiver support, but it's not
economically feasible to separate out that code and teqc's deep dependance
on those headers.  With the decision to freeze teqc, there is no ongoing
work on the code base, and no future requirements for development.

You are not alone in your concerns of transitioning from teqc as our
process is deeply entrenched in the teqc code and the change is not going
to be easy or painless.

-Mike

On Wed, Sep 18, 2019 at 9:46 AM Douglas Hunt <dhunt at ucar.edu> wrote:

> Hi Mike:  Is there any way to disentagle the non-disclosure code from the
> rest of teqc?  It would be a pity to lose teqc as a viable tool just
> because Lou retired.  Our project at UCAR/CDAAC uses teqc all over, and we
> have been willing to accept binary-only code since we assumed it would be
> supported by UNAVCO.
>
> Regards,
>
>   Doug Hunt
>   UCAR/COSMIC
>   Software Engineer IV
>
> On 9/18/19 8:58 AM, Mike Rost wrote:
>
> No teqc code can not be released under a GPL as it contains source code to
> access manufacturer data formats that are under a non-disclosure agreement.
>
> -M
>
> Mike Rost
> Software Engineer III
> UNAVCO
>
>
> On Tue, Sep 17, 2019 at 10:38 PM Anders Wallin <
> anders.e.e.wallin at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Does UNAVCO have a roadmap for making the teqc source available under an
>> open license? (maybe it already is? - but I found only binaries on the
>> website...)
>> If the source is hosted on e.g. github under a suitable license there
>> could be a community of users from various institutions that can provide at
>> least minimal maintenance (e.g. as OSs and libraries evolve)
>>
>> Anders
>>
>> On Tue, Sep 17, 2019 at 5:54 PM Frederick Blume <blume at unavco.org> wrote:
>>
>>> All,
>>>
>>> Firstly, there will be no further updates too teqc.  It is frozen in
>>> time as currently posted, with the final version dated 2019Feb25.
>>>
>>> However the fact that the executables are tagged with older versions of
>>> a given OS does not indicate lack of compatibility with current versions.
>>> In the case of the Mac OS X version, I am happily running the final teqc
>>> compilation on OS X 10.14.6 in spite of the fact that it was compiled on a
>>> Mac running an earlier version of the OS.  We had been doing this to ensure
>>> backwards compatibility with older OS versions.
>>>
>>> In the case of Yolande’s linux version, the fact that teqc was compiled
>>> on linux 2.x does not mean it won’t run on 5.x - download it and give it a
>>> try.  As the note *1 on the downloads page indicates:
>>>
>>> "*1 crashes of one or the other build have occurred on various Linux
>>> releases; if you have tried the statically-linked build and it crashes, try
>>> the dynamically-linked build, or vice versa "
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Best,
>>> Freddy B.
>>>
>>> ====================
>>> Dr. Frederick Blume
>>> Sr. Project Manager
>>> UNAVCO
>>> 6350 Nautilus Dr.
>>> Boulder, CO  80301-5553
>>> (303)579-9952
>>> http://www.unavco.org
>>> ====================
>>>
>>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://postal.unavco.org/pipermail/teqc/attachments/20190918/c25c6be5/attachment-0001.html>


More information about the teqc mailing list