Date: Wed, 20 Jun 2012 10:55:58 -0500 From: Antonio Olivares <olivares14031@gmail.com> To: Wojciech Puchar <wojtek@wojtek.tensor.gdynia.pl> Cc: FreeBSD Questions <freebsd-questions@freebsd.org> Subject: Re: Why Clang Message-ID: <CAJ5UdcOwD-gpw548fkHnuzUp3R%2BwTOPvna5Z8J079T4VVKGB=A@mail.gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <alpine.BSF.2.00.1206201644190.1476@wojtek.tensor.gdynia.pl> References: <4FCF9333.70201@speakeasy.org> <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> <20120619205225.21d6709f.freebsd@edvax.de> <20f61898ce668c96f8882981cf8e24f6@remailer.privacy.at> <4FE1AD27.8000704@gmail.com> <CAH3a3KWHYC%2BpbkdQWF4Pfqv=W0Ldzo8q4T8Ta5wgsryocxNFuA@mail.gmail.com> <1340192731894-5720039.post@n5.nabble.com> <4FE1BD0E.5060300@pukruppa.de> <alpine.BSF.2.00.1206201416540.24484@wojtek.tensor.gdynia.pl> <CA%2B0MdpOftiWE%2B1Gqn5USxu87RPB_7WAGTXnOGU0dp99CMXMYTw@mail.gmail.com> <alpine.BSF.2.00.1206201644190.1476@wojtek.tensor.gdynia.pl>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Wed, Jun 20, 2012 at 9:44 AM, Wojciech Puchar <wojtek@wojtek.tensor.gdynia.pl> wrote: >> licensed gcc or b) A maintained and current GPLv3 gcc with GPLv3 >> licensed libc. > > FreeBSD doesn't use GNU libc. am i missing something? > No they don't :) It is good that they don't. Why? Because of the changes from GPLv2 to GPLv3. Everything created with this license requires that everything be built with it :( This is why it can't be used in base. You can still use gcc, but it will not be in base. Many folks have tried to explain this, but you compare things that will most likely give the edge to gcc over clang. Take for instance the linux kernel. It is still GPLv2 and will most likely continue there. Why? Many developers don't like the change to GPLv3. See http://lkml.org/lkml/2007/6/12/232 http://www.internetnews.com/dev-news/article.php/3633931/Linux+Developers+Reject+GPLv3.htm I have seen many arguments and have been part of many flames/flaming GNU since I also use Linux based OS. I like FreeBSD and wondered why they also allow GPL stuff, but then I realized that it was in ports and the move to avoid gcc is in the base. You can still use the gcc, but it(FreeBSD system will be built with Clang). The move has been made and I see that it was necessary to avoid many GNUisms that take place. Politics, and Religious things aside, you can also see the following: http://www.articlesbase.com/operating-systems-articles/666-beggars-want-fle-licensing-stop-the-cult-of-government-3781316.html http://z505.com/gng/index.htm I have some friends that develop software. They had released it under GNU umbrella. Later on, other folks were taking advantage and not giving back as the license requires. There was little to no way to enforce the license, he decided to move to other license that protects his work and let others use it was well with little to no strings attached. He know uses the CDDL which is also an Open Source License. He can give you many reasons as to why the GPLv3 is the wrong way to go. I can ask him for these and other reasons at your request. Regards, Antonio
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?CAJ5UdcOwD-gpw548fkHnuzUp3R%2BwTOPvna5Z8J079T4VVKGB=A>