This is the mail archive of the
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: clang and FSF's strategy
- From: Richard Stallman <rms at gnu dot org>
- To: Michael Witten <mfwitten at gmail dot com>
- Cc: jordigh at octave dot org, esr at thyrsus dot com, gcc at gcc dot gnu dot org, emacs-devel at gnu dot org
- Date: Thu, 23 Jan 2014 12:17:57 -0500
- Subject: Re: clang and FSF's strategy
- Authentication-results: sourceware.org; auth=none
- References: <20140121201949 dot 21DE1380522 at snark dot thyrsus dot com> <1390401184 dot 29263 dot 5 dot camel at Iris> <CAMOZ1BuLknscdnti45kDJgnXw=GD0ft=ARbDoSj=POyoS710DA at mail dot gmail dot com>
- Reply-to: rms at gnu dot org
[[[ To any NSA and FBI agents reading my email: please consider ]]]
[[[ whether defending the US Constitution against all enemies, ]]]
[[[ foreign or domestic, requires you to follow Snowden's example. ]]]
> The fact that these non-free tools are not based on gcc are a
> testament to how proprietary software developers cannot plug into gcc,
> and how clang is fostering non-free software.
What does it matter whether clang fosters non-free software if clang *also*
fosters free software?
Non-free software is an injustice. Our goal is to eliminate that
injustice, to give computer users freedom. Developing free software
part of what we do to achieve this goal.
When any program fosters non-free software, that works directly
against the overall goal.
Copyleft is our method of making sure that our free software does not
generate nonfree competitors which consist of our code plus something
else that is off limits to us.
Dr Richard Stallman
President, Free Software Foundation
51 Franklin St
Boston MA 02110
Skype: No way! That's nonfree (freedom-denying) software.
Use Ekiga or an ordinary phone call.