From owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG  Thu Jan 29 03:10:12 2009
Return-Path: <owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG>
Delivered-To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org
Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34])
	by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 618641065670
	for <freebsd-current@freebsd.org>; Thu, 29 Jan 2009 03:10:12 +0000 (UTC)
	(envelope-from sgk@troutmask.apl.washington.edu)
Received: from troutmask.apl.washington.edu (troutmask.apl.washington.edu
	[128.208.78.105])
	by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 24C378FC1E
	for <freebsd-current@freebsd.org>; Thu, 29 Jan 2009 03:10:12 +0000 (UTC)
	(envelope-from sgk@troutmask.apl.washington.edu)
Received: from troutmask.apl.washington.edu (localhost.apl.washington.edu
	[127.0.0.1])
	by troutmask.apl.washington.edu (8.14.3/8.14.3) with ESMTP id
	n0T39p87009639; Wed, 28 Jan 2009 19:09:51 -0800 (PST)
	(envelope-from sgk@troutmask.apl.washington.edu)
Received: (from sgk@localhost)
	by troutmask.apl.washington.edu (8.14.3/8.14.3/Submit) id
	n0T39oFg009638; Wed, 28 Jan 2009 19:09:50 -0800 (PST)
	(envelope-from sgk)
Date: Wed, 28 Jan 2009 19:09:50 -0800
From: Steve Kargl <sgk@troutmask.apl.washington.edu>
To: "Daniel O'Connor" <doconnor@gsoft.com.au>
Message-ID: <20090129030950.GA9605@troutmask.apl.washington.edu>
References: <20090128155340.GA75143@lpthe.jussieu.fr>
	<200901291243.00378.doconnor@gsoft.com.au>
	<49811242.7030106@delphij.net>
	<200901291330.18007.doconnor@gsoft.com.au>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <200901291330.18007.doconnor@gsoft.com.au>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.2.3i
Cc: freebsd-current@freebsd.org, d@delphij.net,
	Michel Talon <talon@lpthe.jussieu.fr>
Subject: Re: Alternatives to gcc (was Re: gcc 4.3: when will
	it	becomestandard compiler?)
X-BeenThere: freebsd-current@freebsd.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5
Precedence: list
List-Id: Discussions about the use of FreeBSD-current
	<freebsd-current.freebsd.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current>, 
	<mailto:freebsd-current-request@freebsd.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-current>
List-Post: <mailto:freebsd-current@freebsd.org>
List-Help: <mailto:freebsd-current-request@freebsd.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current>,
	<mailto:freebsd-current-request@freebsd.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 29 Jan 2009 03:10:12 -0000

On Thu, Jan 29, 2009 at 01:30:09PM +1030, Daniel O'Connor wrote:
> On Thursday 29 January 2009 12:49:46 Xin LI wrote:
> > > The "eligible compilation process" is where you use GCC and GPL
> > > compatible software.
> > >
> > > I think for the FreeBSD project that is fine.
> >
> > I agree, this term seems to be targeted to companies behind closed
> > source optimizers.  Speaking for myself, I think FreeBSD would avoid
> > GPLv3 code where possible to minimize the risk it would introduce to
> > commercial users of our codebase, we want our code be used by as many
> > people as possible to better exploit its value.
> 
> Seems like a fairly marginal case (speaking as someone who ships proprietary 
> software built by GCC running on FreeBSD).
> 
> I think for the compiler/tool chain GPLv3 is OK, but for example, in libraries 
> it would [very] bad.
> 
> Luckily I don't see that being a problem for FreeBSD :)
> 

The FSF has not decided what to do about the runtime libraries.
These are currently gplv2+link time exception.  In the future,
the libraries may be gplv3 + some new link time exception.

- 
Steve