Date: Thu, 21 Jun 2012 13:26:26 +0200 (CEST) From: Wojciech Puchar <wojtek@wojtek.tensor.gdynia.pl> To: Thomas Mueller <mueller23@insightbb.com> Cc: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org, Antonio Olivares <olivares14031@gmail.com> Subject: Re: Why Clang Message-ID: <alpine.BSF.2.00.1206211324370.2112@wojtek.tensor.gdynia.pl> In-Reply-To: <CF.D3.12873.263F2EF4@smtp02.insight.synacor.com> References: <CF.D3.12873.263F2EF4@smtp02.insight.synacor.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
>> wrong way to go. I can ask him for these and other reasons at your >> request. > > Yes, that would be a good idea, not so much for me as for others who want to better understand the licensing issues of GCC compared to Clang. i would like to hear this. but only in C compiler context. i understand the other issues, but IMHO there are none about using GPLv3 licenced compiler to compile non-opensource programs.
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?alpine.BSF.2.00.1206211324370.2112>