This is the mail archive of the
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: FSF Policy re. inclusion of source code from other projects in GCC
- From: "Richard Guenther" <richard dot guenther at gmail dot com>
- To: "Mark Mitchell" <mark at codesourcery dot com>
- Cc: gcc at gcc dot gnu dot org, gcc-patches <gcc-patches at gcc dot gnu dot org>
- Date: Fri, 17 Mar 2006 22:19:20 +0100
- Subject: Re: FSF Policy re. inclusion of source code from other projects in GCC
- References: <441B25F2.email@example.com>
On 3/17/06, Mark Mitchell <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote:
> Richard Guenther, would you please add a README to libgcc-math
> explaining that it that the GLIBC code is not part of GCC, as per the
> web page above? Also, please document that all of the GLIBC files are
I will do so.
> not to be changed, except by reimporting from GLIBC. If any of the
> GLIBC files have been changed from their upstream sources, please submit
> those changes to the GLIBC maintainers ASAP.
I will try to get the (minor) changes accepted upstream.
> Because RMS has approved the use of GLIBC's software floating-point code
> in GCC's runtime libraries, using GPL + exception, the correct thing for
> Joseph Myers to do with his recent patch is to mark those files as not
> part of GCC, but rather as part of GLIBC, and adjust the copyright
> notice to be GPL + exception. Joseph should also document (in a README
> or similar) that these files are not to be changed, except by import
> from upstream GLIBC.
Do I understand this correctly that the upstream GLIBC versions of the
files will get their license changed, or will this happen only in the GCC