Plugging into GCC
Plugging into GCC
Posted Oct 3, 2008 0:38 UTC (Fri) by gmaxwell (guest, #30048)In reply to: Plugging into GCC by faramir
Parent article: Plugging into GCC
So, your bad scenario is already completely possible. The idea, as I understand it, behind the run-time licensing change it to poison the prospects of a commercial marketplace for proprietary plugins.
I'll be more inclined to believe that such a requirement is not necessary when there no longer exists a market for expensive vendor specific compilers for various embedded systems (TI c64x DSPs, for example).
Vendors who are currently raking in additional development fees licensing compilers would have a much easier time if they just had to build and sell a proprietary backend for GCC... so the incentive to not bother with that particular business model would be substantially reduced with an unrestricted plugin model for GCC.
Posted Jan 30, 2009 2:21 UTC (Fri)
by xoddam (subscriber, #2322)
[Link]
The normal compiler and "system libraries" are exempt in normal circumstances thanks to this language (GPL v2, section 3): "as a special exception, the source code distributed need not include anything that is normally distributed (in either source or binary form) with the major components (compiler, kernel, and so on) of the operating system on which the executable runs".
As far as I can tell, there is nothing magic about a non-standard compiler (or compiler plugin) that exempts it from this requirement.
Of course that doesn't mean that the compiler itself *is* part of the source -- just that it's impossible to fulfil the requirement to distribute source without it, if the compiler is unusual.
build tools form part of "corresponding source code"