Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Thu, 21 Jun 2012 20:22:07 +0200 (CEST)
From:      Wojciech Puchar <wojtek@wojtek.tensor.gdynia.pl>
To:        Stas Verberkt <legolas@legolasweb.nl>
Cc:        freebsd-questions@freebsd.org
Subject:   Re: Why Clang
Message-ID:  <alpine.BSF.2.00.1206212021190.12951@wojtek.tensor.gdynia.pl>
In-Reply-To: <a66129cd8eca4a9fc311b5cc6f8c90a2@homey.local>
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> <a66129cd8eca4a9fc311b5cc6f8c90a2@homey.local>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
>> 
> 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". :)

GNU GPL is even worse that i ever dreamed (in worst horror).




Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?alpine.BSF.2.00.1206212021190.12951>