Date: Mon, 4 Aug 2008 20:59:26 -0700 From: Gary Kline <kline@thought.org> To: Chuck Swiger <cswiger@mac.com> Cc: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Subject: Re: When gcc43 is expected to be in base? Message-ID: <20080805035925.GC20518@thought.org> In-Reply-To: <0F274EB7-AB91-45E3-89ED-3ADCC42F9E42@mac.com> References: <18736784.post@talk.nabble.com> <48909534.9040608@FreeBSD.org> <48971F22.3000601@carebears.mine.nu> <48975C9B.9040103@FreeBSD.org> <20080804165237.39f79c49@scorpio> <20080804230918.GA12219@thought.org> <0F274EB7-AB91-45E3-89ED-3ADCC42F9E42@mac.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Mon, Aug 04, 2008 at 05:20:10PM -0700, Chuck Swiger wrote: > On Aug 4, 2008, at 4:09 PM, Gary Kline wrote: > >On Mon, Aug 04, 2008 at 04:52:37PM -0400, Gerard wrote: > >>Since it appears to be apparent that newer software might very well > >>be > >>released under the GPLv3 license, it might behoove the FreeBSD team > >>to > >>rethink its ideas or beliefs regarding the inclusion of such software > >>into the base system. At the very least, it might very well make life > >>easier for end users who need the support that programs using that > >>license are now offering. > > > > I must have missed something along the way, because I don't > > understand what the "preferences" are to *not* use 4.3. I have > > it buiilt and runing here on my mail desktop and at least one > > other FBSD server. > > > > Clues, please. > > Oh, there's nothing wrong with you as an individual running gcc-4.3 if > you like. > > Nor is there anything wrong with the GPLv3 license-- it's well-crafted > and handles certain technical issues resulting from varied legal > systems quite well compared to most other licenses (eg, clause 17 for > many European jurisdictions which do not permit one to completely > disclaim liability), *provided* one is working on completely open > systems. > > However, anyone who needs to do things with cryptography and signing > is going to find GPLv3 clauses 3 and 6 unworkable. FreeBSD (and > NetBSD, OpenBSD, etc) are attractive for people building embedded > systems because they are (mostly) not GPL(v2)-encumbered, and adopting > GPLv3 code would make that problem worse. [[ paragraphs deleted. (*mumble*) ]] yeah, i undersand the larger picture. and i'll stop right here. thanks for the dope-slap. gary > > Regards, > -- > -Chuck > -- Gary Kline kline@thought.org http://www.thought.org Public Service Unix http://jottings.thought.org http://transfinite.thought.org
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20080805035925.GC20518>