optimization/3329: optimization large memory copies uses kern el memcpy function without user's knowledge.

[Araneda, Dorian]

The following reply was made to PR optimization/3329; it has been noted by GNATS.

From: "Araneda, Dorian" <dorian.araneda@intel.com>
To: "'Richard Henderson'" <rth@redhat.com>
Cc: "'rth@gcc.gnu.org'" <rth@gcc.gnu.org>,
   "'gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org'"<gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org>,
   "'gcc-prs@gcc.gnu.org'" <gcc-prs@gcc.gnu.org>,
   "'nobody@gcc.gnu.org'" <nobody@gcc.gnu.org>,
   "'gcc-gnats@gcc.gnu.org'" <gcc-gnats@gcc.gnu.org>
Subject: RE: optimization/3329: optimization large memory copies uses kern
	 el memcpy function without user's knowledge.
Date: Tue, 2 Apr 2002 13:20:49 -0800 

 Henderson,
 
 you dismissal without consideration was NOT civil.
 and you can not point out any reason for your flame.
 your response did not address my question so I felt
 you did not understand what I was suggesting and I emailed
 a more detailed description of  the bug.
 
 could you please point out where in that email did
 I say something to deserve such a inflammatory reply from you
 and to have it CC'ed to everyone in the world?
 
 I do not feel like I have to be apologetic for either disagreeing 
 with you or being upset at your response aimed at publicly
 flaming me because I disagreed with your decision.
 
 and I do not think I have to be apologetic for defending myself
 publicly when I had been flamed publicly.
 
 -Dorian
 
 -----Original Message-----
 From: Richard Henderson [mailto:rth@redhat.com]
 Sent: Tuesday, April 02, 2002 3:12 PM
 To: Araneda, Dorian
 Cc: 'rth@gcc.gnu.org'; 'gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org'; 'gcc-prs@gcc.gnu.org';
 'nobody@gcc.gnu.org'; 'gcc-gnats@gcc.gnu.org'
 Subject: Re: optimization/3329: optimization large memory copies uses
 kern el memcpy function without user's knowledge.
 
 
 On Tue, Apr 02, 2002 at 11:31:58AM -0800, Araneda, Dorian wrote:
 > If closed source code has to depend on gnu open
 > source code(linux memcpy), whether in binary form or not, 
 > the close source falls under the gnu license and must 
 > be distributed as gnu open source.
 
 No, that's incorrect.  Not all symbols are created equal.
 Some of them are marked as GPL-only, some of them are not.
 
 You should go back and review the licences involved.
 
 > IRREGARDLESS IF I AM RIGHT OR WRONG, I don't care to even give
 > the chance of accidentally creating a dependency within our 
 > proprietary closed source code to gnu open source.
 
 Then you can't use gcc at all.  We reserve the right to generate
 code that calls into any of the compiler support routines in libgcc,
 plus a select number of ISO C routines from libc.  (The fact that
 these symbols are packaged differently in the kernel than in userland
 is immaterial.)
 
 > I sure hope you are not anyone important at redhat
 > with that "So what, I have no sympathy" elitist
 > attitude that you exhibited.  It shows poor character.
 [...]
 > As far as I am concerned this issue OVER along with 
 > the FLAME thread you decided to initiate.
 
 Well, gee, I thought MY first message was pretty civil.
 You're the one telling me I don't know what I'm talking about.
 
 
 r~