Date: Thu, 21 Jun 2012 19:16:31 +0200 (CEST) From: Wojciech Puchar <wojtek@wojtek.tensor.gdynia.pl> To: "Roger B.A. Klorese" <rogerk@queernet.org> Cc: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Why Clang Message-ID: <alpine.BSF.2.00.1206211916060.4170@wojtek.tensor.gdynia.pl> In-Reply-To: <4FE35616.9080304@queernet.org> References: <402199FE-380B-41B6-866B-7D5D66C457D5@lpthe.jussieu.fr> <CAH3a3KWKNF5Bt-8=KgtbMh=rV6GfUO7OaeE6-SutxkcRe8cG3Q@mail.gmail.com> <alpine.BSF.2.00.1206191953280.8234@wojtek.tensor.gdynia.pl> <20120621015237.GB58187@neutralgood.org> <AC6A916E-066B-4399-89E1-90C2394327E7@lpthe.jussieu.fr> <4FE35208.40708@queernet.org> <alpine.BSF.2.00.1206211907470.4170@wojtek.tensor.gdynia.pl> <4FE35616.9080304@queernet.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
>> >> "We put clang because sponsors wanted it." >> > > > Sponsors didn't want clang. Sponsors wanted not to be encumbered by a GPLv3 they are not. programs compiled by GPLv3 compiler are not encumbered.
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?alpine.BSF.2.00.1206211916060.4170>