| |||||||||||||
Crystal Clear?Crystal Clear?Posted Jan 28, 2009 13:30 UTC (Wed) by sylware (guest, #35259)Parent article: The new GCC runtime library exemption
They should combine what they wrote in the modified GPLv3 with crystal clear terms like:
"GCC plugins, including their dependencies requiered for maximum functionality and performance, shall all be GPL".
(Log in to post comments)
Crystal Clear? Posted Jan 28, 2009 14:09 UTC (Wed) by ikm (subscriber, #493) [Link]
I think I've brought this up before here: http://lwn.net/Articles/301633/
Crystal Clear? Posted Jan 28, 2009 16:50 UTC (Wed) by JoeBuck (subscriber, #2330) [Link] The reason why it wasn't done that way is that you could then write a GPL plugin that would convert from GCC internal format to a different format and dump to a file, and another one to do the inverse direction: read the file dump back into GCC. Then your proprietary optimizations would work on the alternative representation in the dump file, and not be derivative works of any GPL code at all.The alternative chosen does not forbid the above, it just says that if you do it that way, you lose the exception that lets you link proprietary code to the language support libraries. A determined developer could just write his/her own, or use older GCC libraries.
|
|||||||||||||