Date: Wed, 27 Feb 2002 12:15:37 -0800 From: Terry Lambert <tlambert2@mindspring.com> To: Mike Meyer <mwm-dated-1015265803.f405fc@mired.org> Cc: Michael Lucas <mwlucas@blackhelicopters.org>, Matthew Emmerton <matt@gsicomp.on.ca>, Patrik Sundberg <ps@radiac.mine.nu>, chat@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: valgrind Message-ID: <3C7D3E69.C791AAEE@mindspring.com> References: <20020227151310.GA47084@raquel.radiac.mine.nu> <Pine.BSF.4.21.0202271056400.45612-100000@xena.gsicomp.on.ca> <20020227114239.A63680@blackhelicopters.org> <3C7D18EE.D2ED04A@mindspring.com> <15485.8842.438366.492284@guru.mired.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Mike Meyer wrote: > [Moved to -chat from -current *and* -stable. Bleah.] > Terry Lambert <tlambert2@mindspring.com> types: > > This is why FreeBSD lets people use GPL'ed components as an > > "after market" item, but does not distribute them: it is in > > the ditribution that the clause activates. > > I could *swear* that I got gcc with my distribution of FreeBSD. Or > does this statement only apply to kernel components? It only applies to code with one license linked to code with a different license. So yes, it applies to the kernel, and no, it doesn't apply to distribution of GCC and other GPL'ed tools whose output is not covered by the GPL (or some other immiscible license) merely because it originated with tools of a particular license. If you examine the history of Bison, you will see that the license on the skeleton code was GPL, but that this was at one time changed so that people would actually use Bison, instead of simply ignoring it. -- Terry To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-chat" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?3C7D3E69.C791AAEE>