[surjan@chem.elte.hu: x86_64 fortran]

[Douglas Cox]

On Friday 16 July 2004 05:41 pm, Steve Kargl wrote:
> On Fri, Jul 16, 2004 at 05:29:18PM -0400, Douglas Cox wrote:
> > Well, g95 is free, and it certainly appears to be a GNU production, if
> > you check the source files.
>
> If you equate "GNU production" with "uses the GPL", then I suppose
> you can claim g95 is a GNU production.  Andy slapped the GPL onto
> the code, yet does not folloiw the tenets of the GPL.  If you mean
> "GNU production" as in a "FSF sponsored project", then no g95 is
> not a GNU production.

How does this affect your view on the porting of code from g95 to gfortran? I 
don't remember any objections being raised.  Seems like, in your view, it 
would be "tainting" gfortran...

Douglas Cox