Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Tue, 19 Jun 2012 19:54:45 +0200 (CEST)
From:      Wojciech Puchar <wojtek@wojtek.tensor.gdynia.pl>
To:        Fred Morcos <fred.morcos@gmail.com>
Cc:        David Brodbeck <gull@gull.us>, Michel Talon <talon@lpthe.jussieu.fr>, FreeBSD Questions <freebsd-questions@freebsd.org>
Subject:   Re: Why Clang
Message-ID:  <alpine.BSF.2.00.1206191953280.8234@wojtek.tensor.gdynia.pl>
In-Reply-To: <CAH3a3KWKNF5Bt-8=KgtbMh=rV6GfUO7OaeE6-SutxkcRe8cG3Q@mail.gmail.com>
References:  <402199FE-380B-41B6-866B-7D5D66C457D5@lpthe.jussieu.fr> <CAH3a3KWKNF5Bt-8=KgtbMh=rV6GfUO7OaeE6-SutxkcRe8cG3Q@mail.gmail.com>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> I would also guess that the base system is stuck with gcc ~4.1 due to
> the GPLv3-ization of later gcc version. Is that correct?

true.


anyway - can someone point me an article about explaining in human 
language (contrary to lawyer language) why GPLv3 is more limiting in 
reality over v2 .

Does GPLv3 does force programs you compile with gcc to be GPLed?




Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?alpine.BSF.2.00.1206191953280.8234>