This is the mail archive of the gcc@gcc.gnu.org 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]

Re: LPGL (was "GCC2 merging")




On 15 Oct 1998, Jason Merrill wrote:

> >>>>> James Mansion <james@westongold.com> writes:

> I would like to see a variant of the LGPL which does not place any
> requirements on a "work that uses the Library".  I want to protect the
> library itself, but have the legal requirements on a program that uses the
> library be the same as on a program that is compiled with gcc; namely,
> none.  This is necessary for the C++ standard library, to make g++ a viable
> alternative to proprietary compilers.  This is currently achieved by using
> the libgcc exception to the GPL, but I would rather have an LGPL-based
> license so that users are not required to use gcc.

This is a desirable thing which I call the Run-Time GPL. It has
essentially already been used on libgcc, the GNAT run-time. the GUILE
run-time (unsure of this one), and RTEMS.

--joel



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