BusyBox settles another lawsuit

Very well. It is because vendors sometimes think of "full source" as — or even get it told in
the settlement — to "provide the full toolchain", and that definitely is a bit redundant if it
is just the vanilla binutils and gcc sources used in mips crosscompiling mode!

I have checked out the downloads pages of some companies that are listed on gpl-violations.org
— and almost universally they provide a ridiculously big 70+ megabyte something tar with all
the tools I mostly have already¹. No wonder everybody gets to think "think about the bandwidth
this will cost us...".

Of course it is a different thing if compiler/binutils was enhanced by, say, a new
architecture, but most of the times, the sold devices seem to be standard mips stuff.

They do not just need an Open Source Compliance Officer, they need someone with common sense
of release management, does not even need to be an officially approved "officer" if some
random employee has the needed sense.

¹And my recommendation is: split it up. Provide compiler, binutils and source packages plus
patches as separate entities if possible. Like, uh, the Debian repository, aka.
{gcc,binutils,busybox}{.tar,.diff}.bz2, making a mere 6 base files, providing all that Rob
Landley (and me too) would want whilst giving a way for saving bandwidth — because now I can
just dl busybox instead of the fat uninteresting compiler package.