"" No, but it is opposed to distributing closed-source vendors' code for them. I'd have
thought this would be obvious.""
You mean,... who ever puts in their repositorys win4lin or the free vmware player that anyone
can download and install for free... ha! not to mention the commercial version of crossover
that always lags several months what is then release to the wine tree... is gonna to be
banished from the community. I 'm a strong supporter of FOSS, under my possibilities probably
is not you that is more supportive... but i really find that an hypocrisy...
Happily is not true. Doesn't anyone offer close source apps ?... Linspire CNR ?, Mandriva Club
?,... Xandros ?.... i haven't really checked but i believe they do. ah!... Adobe reader is not
FOSS and i have installed it from my distro repository...
"" RMS's objection was that a persistent IL in any form would provide an irresistible
temptation to others to provide ways to effectively replace parts of GCC with non-free
And so what!?... if GCC gets in the same kind of agglutination paradigma, that Linux with its
LSF gets with everybody wanting to participate eagerly including big industry players, then
GCC has nothing to fear, because GCC will always be better... let them try !?
Better GCC can be in GPLv3, and be very watchful of the Industry lobbying and influence. What
GCC should not do, IMHO, is be in the fear and refuse splendid ideas and and potential tech
innovations because of the fear that other can do of abuse.
I'm not implying that GCC and RMS should loose their principals... never!
What i'm saying is that GCC and RMS have nothing to fear from abuse if they can get the clear
Its like the so much talked about court of law prove about GPL validity. People have abused
GPL several times, but abusers have always steped back,... FOSS is too dynamic and technologic
acute for law suits. What is the point of litigation even if an abuser think in his mind that
he can win , if by the time it is settled, things have moved so rapidly that the pieces of
code involved don't make sense anymore?...
Now if GCC is left behind technologically, it will be much more prone to abuse, than if it
risks and gets into techs that are clearly not screen free from abuse.
ILs... nothing should be set in stone forever, specially an IR format... there can be always
jumps... new headings... new ideas...
"" I'm afraid this makes no sense at all to me. Why would hardware manufacturers care how code
was distributed? ""
Well that is the whole point, they don't.... but the whole idea about "Fusion" style chips,
and "streaming" optimizations being for ATI/SSE5 or Intel AVX or whatever Nvidia cooks, is
going to be here fast, and its going to catch the whole set on fire... multicore, manycore,
will be even on entry level desktops and wont take that many years to be in embedded...
Many users will be wonting "streaming", i want it too... the current approach of GCC doesn't
seam to me completely adequate... its not an insult... its only a temporary and minor issue i
want to believe...
Get "bold" please.