This is the mail archive of the
gcc@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: Compiler for Red Hat Linux 8
- To: Per Bothner <per at bothner dot com>, Joe Buck <jbuck at synopsys dot com>
- Subject: Re: Compiler for Red Hat Linux 8
- From: Alex Rosenberg <alexr at spies dot com>
- Date: Wed, 18 Jul 2001 23:00:32 -0700
- CC: <dewar at gnat dot com>, <gcc at gcc dot gnu dot org>, <geoffk at redhat dot com>
on 7/18/01 10:41 PM, Per Bothner at per@bothner.com wrote:
> Joe Buck <jbuck@synopsys.com> writes:
>
>> Per Bothner wrote:
>>> If A gives B a GPL'd compiler under the proviso of a NDA prohibiting
>>> A from distributing the compiler to third parties that is a very
>>> different matter. I don't think that in itself violate the GPL.
>>
>> Nope, read it again. The GPL requires that all recipients be given a
>> license to redistribute.
>
> But A is not the recipient - A is the one providing the compile to B.
> B is of course free to redistribute the compiler. But we are talking
> about the case where the NDA binds *A*, not B. Think A==RedHat;
> B==Intel; RedHat signs NDA and develops compiler port; Intel receives
> compiler from GCC. RedHat is bound by the NDA; Intel is free to
> r-distribute GCC under GPL, and is not bound by the NDA; viola no
> conflict.
>
> Now if Intel then distributes GCC to a third party under an NDA,
> *then* there is a confloct.
It sounds like you've just described a common situation. Notably, this
sounds like the Playtation 2 situation.
+------------------------------------------------------------+
| Alexander M. Rosenberg <mailto:alexr@_spies.com> |
| Nobody cares what I say. Remove the underscore to mail me. |