Date: Thu, 21 Jun 2012 19:45:35 +0200 From: Stas Verberkt <legolas@legolasweb.nl> To: <freebsd-questions@freebsd.org> Subject: Re: Why Clang Message-ID: <a66129cd8eca4a9fc311b5cc6f8c90a2@homey.local> In-Reply-To: <op.wf9j6hw834t2sn@tech304> 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> <alpine.BSF.2.00.1206211916060.4170@wojtek.tensor.gdynia.pl> <op.wf9j6hw834t2sn@tech304>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Mark Felder schreef op 21-06-2012 19:28: > On Thu, 21 Jun 2012 12:16:31 -0500, Wojciech Puchar > <wojtek@wojtek.tensor.gdynia.pl> wrote: > >> programs compiled by GPLv3 compiler are not encumbered. > > This has not been decided in court yet. > Additionally, the exceptions for using the GCC runtime library for non-GPL executables is limited to what hey call "eligible compilation processes", what rules out using proprietary GCC plugins or other combinations of core GCC functionality with non-GPL tooling and extensions. Please note that this is indeed not tested in court. Therefore, reality may turn out even more interesting. That's why a lawyer's answer should always be "it depends". :)
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?a66129cd8eca4a9fc311b5cc6f8c90a2>