| |||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||
better alternatives fast approachingbetter alternatives fast approachingPosted Nov 20, 2007 6:29 UTC (Tue) by rsidd (subscriber, #2582)In reply to: better alternatives fast approaching by nix Parent article: GCC unplugged LLVM's licence is basically the BSD licence, so that was clearly not the issue. (Third party components like the GCC front-end are, of course, under different licences. Eventually the front-end will be Clang, so that's not an issue either.)
(Log in to post comments)
better alternatives fast approaching Posted Nov 20, 2007 10:08 UTC (Tue) by nix (subscriber, #2304) [Link] Er, oopsy, mental license collision between similarly-named projects with utterly different purposes (I was hunting a possible bug in LVM at the time I posted that... LVM, LLVM, what's the difference, other than the license, the purpose, the design, and in fact everything other than the name?)
|
|
||||||||||||