Red Hat: no desktop products coming
Posted Apr 21, 2008 19:21 UTC (Mon) by nix
In reply to: Red Hat: no desktop products coming
Parent article: Red Hat: no desktop products coming
Neither is the binary, even packed in RPM format, that Adobe does using
GCC, and that distros include in their repositorys.
Distros that don't ship non-free software don't ship that binary (assuming
you mean Flash). (Is it even redistributable? I thought most distros
shipped a script that downloaded it from Adobe.)
if GCC had been partitionable as you suggest, we wouldn't have a free
Objective C frontend today.)
Why not ?... is the Objective C frontend close source ?
No, but had it been easy to get it to emit something that GCC's backend
could have processed, the frontend would
have been closed-source.
(This is a matter of historical record by this point. If I'm wrong, Joe
Buck can tell me I'm full of crap, if he's still reading.)
But if that happens wouldn't it be a clear GPL violation ?
If GCC emits a stable intermediate representation (as it would have to for
distros to usefully ship things in that form), and accepts that
representation for further processing, then having some closed-source
program emit it probably would not
be a GPL violation: at least it
would be very hard to prove. This is why GCC doesn't, and won't, emit a
stable intermediate representation. (The representation used for link-time
optimizations is, as I understand it, by design not stable enough to be
usefully emittable by anything but GCC, and definitely not intended as a
medium to transport code between machines in.)
isn't AMD CTM/CAL open sourced ?... what is so terrible wrong about
cooperation so that the lower parts of that driver could be modular and
treated by GCC the same way that Linux treats firmware ?
This is already doable by implementing a GCC backend that accepts whatever
representation the CTM/CAL code generator accepts. It's just like
cross-compilation, in fact it is
cross-compilation: exactly the
same mechanism is used to generate code for the Cell SPUs.
But it's not something that magically kicks in: there'd be a different
version of a package that had code like this in it, or perhaps a new glibc
hwcap and corresponding subdirectories searched by the dynamic linker for
shared libraries containing object files in the appropriate form.
I don't have to convince nobody. Time is a cure for everything.
If you want to get GCC to emit a stable intermediate representation, you
have to convince RMS :)
to post comments)