From owner-freebsd-advocacy  Mon Mar 15 11:12:23 1999
Delivered-To: freebsd-advocacy@freebsd.org
Received: from flood.ping.uio.no (flood.ping.uio.no [129.240.78.31])
	by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E3253155FC
	for <freebsd-advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG>; Mon, 15 Mar 1999 11:12:19 -0800 (PST)
	(envelope-from des@flood.ping.uio.no)
Received: (from des@localhost)
	by flood.ping.uio.no (8.9.2/8.9.1) id UAA61269;
	Mon, 15 Mar 1999 20:11:52 +0100 (CET)
	(envelope-from des)
To: Donald Wilde <dwilde1@thuntek.net>
Cc: freebsd-advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG
Subject: Re: License nightmare
References: <36ED1F21.12E97D6D@thuntek.net>
From: Dag-Erling Smorgrav <des@flood.ping.uio.no>
Date: 15 Mar 1999 20:11:51 +0100
In-Reply-To: Donald Wilde's message of "Mon, 15 Mar 1999 07:54:25 -0700"
Message-ID: <xzpogluo9e0.fsf@flood.ping.uio.no>
Lines: 9
X-Mailer: Gnus v5.5/Emacs 19.34
Sender: owner-freebsd-advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG
Precedence: bulk
X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG

Donald Wilde <dwilde1@thuntek.net> writes:
> If GNU gcc is GPL, is FreeBSD in violation, or is it just 'including
> source' and not 'using' that requires disclosure of sources?

Where did you get the idea that we did not distribute the gcc sources?

DES
-- 
Dag-Erling Smorgrav - des@flood.ping.uio.no


To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-advocacy" in the body of the message