Licensing inconsistency, cplus-dem.c/cp-demangle.c/demangle.h

[Mark Mitchell]

> I don't have the time, or the tact, but I'm curious to know what RMS's
> argument for not using the libgcc license was.  From my end, being
> able to use the demangler in libstdc++ and libjava seems like a
> compelling argument for the libgcc license.

Essentially the argument was that this code gave free software a
competitive advantage in that people considering writing code that
needed this functionality could either use our code (which wouldn't
cost them anything to develop) or write their own version (which would
cost them some amount of effort).  Therefore, the existence of this
code as GPL'd software would enduce people to create additional
free software.

I'm sure RMS said it better.

In other words, I think this was roughly the same argument that justifies
the GPL in general.

--
Mark Mitchell                   mark@codesourcery.com
CodeSourcery, LLC               http://www.codesourcery.com