This is the mail archive of the
gcc@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: mixing LGPL and GPL in gcc
- From: Richard Earnshaw <rearnsha at arm dot com>
- To: Aldy Hernandez <aldyh at redhat dot com>
- Cc: rms at gnu dot org, GCC Mailinglist <gcc at gcc dot gnu dot org>, Richard dot Earnshaw at arm dot com
- Date: Mon, 03 Mar 2003 17:25:55 +0000
- Subject: Re: mixing LGPL and GPL in gcc
- Organization: ARM Ltd.
- Reply-to: Richard dot Earnshaw at arm dot com
> Hi Richard.
>
> The feasibility of replacing GCC's soft floating point supporting
> routines (in libgcc) with GLIBC's faster and more accurate
> implementation is being discussed on the GCC list:
>
> http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc/2003-03/msg00013.html
>
> Richard Earnshaw has brought up the issue that GLIBC's implementation
> is LGPL, while the fp-bit.c implementation in GCC is GPL. Is this a
> problem? BTW, both GLIBC's and GCC's implementation are copyrighted by
> the FSF.
It's not that GCC's fp-bit.c is GPL, it's that it has the
special-exception clause attached, so it can appear in libgcc.a
/* As a special exception, if you link this library with other files,
some of which are compiled with GCC, to produce an executable,
this library does not by itself cause the resulting executable
to be covered by the GNU General Public License.
This exception does not however invalidate any other reasons why
the executable file might be covered by the GNU General Public License.
*/
R.