This is the mail archive of the mailing list for the GCC project.

Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]
Other format: [Raw text]

Re: Exhaustive Instructions for Toolchain Generation

On Wed, Oct 4, 2017 at 3:33 AM, David Brown <> wrote:
> R0b0t1, you might not realise this but CodeSoucery is a major
> contributor to gcc and other gnu tools.  Individuals and companies pay
> them for their services - to put together tested, qualified and
> documented bundles of development tools, for support, for porting gnu
> tools to new architectures, for supporting the latest chip families, for
> fixing problems, etc.  The work they do runs right back to gcc -
> patches, fixes, improvements, mailing list support, release management,
> etc.  Take a look at the gcc patches mailing list, or release lists, or
> lists of contributors and maintainers.  You will see CodeSourcery email
> addresses all over the place.
> You make your own choices about where you spend your money or not.  But
> if you use gcc, remember that you are not just using the work of RMS,
> and a bunch of generous idealistic volunteers - you are also using the
> work of companies such as CodeSourcery, Redhat, Intel, Google, and many,
> many others.  You might choose not to pay CodeSourcery for their work
> here, but if you really are going to be "respectful", then you should be
> thanking them rather than condemning them as "the misery of closed
> source software".  They are a fine example of how cooperation between
> commercial entities and free software is supposed to work.
> (This is not a business solicitation, I have no affiliation with
> CodeSourcery.  It just bugs me when people are disrespectful or
> insulting to individuals or companies that are trying to do the right
> thing.)
> David

I find it hard to care about someone's position or affiliation but
instead choose to care about what they do and how they act. If it was
Sandra's intent to ask me for free work, then I am not sure how that
qualifies as "the right thing." Per my latest response to her, even if
that is what she meant to do, my actions were not meant to be an

I apologize if they were interpreted as such, but I would caution
against associating one's work with oneself too closely.

That companies contribute to open source software and that those
contributions are useful is not something I ever wanted to dispute,
but at the end of the day those companies make money by restricting
access to information. There was no indication the information I was
asked to provide would ever benefit the GCC or open source community
at large.


Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]