This is the mail archive of the
gcc@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: Torbjorn's ieeelib.c
- From: Aldy Hernandez <aldyh at redhat dot com>
- To: Mark Mitchell <mark at codesourcery dot com>
- Cc: Richard Henderson <rth at redhat dot com>, Anthony Green <green at redhat dot com>, gcc mailing list <gcc at gcc dot gnu dot org>, "Joseph S. Myers" <joseph at codesourcery dot com>
- Date: Thu, 1 Dec 2005 12:53:51 -0400
- Subject: Re: Torbjorn's ieeelib.c
- References: <438BB76E.8070905@codesourcery.com> <1133296590.3187.9.camel@localhost.localdomain> <438CBD3C.8070901@codesourcery.com> <20051129210123.GA21961@redhat.com> <m3mzjk3oer.fsf@coqui.quesejoda.com> <438F1CEF.1090309@codesourcery.com>
BTW, here is the original thread I had started:
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc/2003-04/msg00695.html
> > There was a thread discussing all this, when I was interested in doing
> > the work. I mailed rms directly, and he said it was ok to use the
> > glibc bits in gcc regardless of the LGPL/GPL disparity.
>
> Do you happen to have a pointer, or a copy of that message? If that
> route ends up making the most sense, then it would be nice to have our
> ducks in a row.
Argh... I've grepped all over my harddrive, but can't find it. But
I *am* sure I sent a mail to rms explaining the whole thing, and he
responded positively. Perhaps he can remember the conversation?
Sorry.