License compliance on updating gcc runtime libraries

[hiraku.toyooka@cybertrust.co.jp]

> Note that nobody can give you definitive answers to questions like this
> since they haven't been litigated.  So any answer is an "educated guess".

Yes. I understand I cannot get definitive answers for license interpretation.

> My view is that it's both, depending on the context.  Remember that, from
> the perspective of copyright law, executing a program is making a "copy"
> of that program.  The GPL (or the Runtime Exception) don't include those
> copies in their specific restrictions and limitations, but when you
> try to define terms, I think you need to reach the fact that these
> are copies.
>
> So:
>
> When the new version of the library is distributed, it's an "independent
> library" and (assuming it's GPL, not LGPL), the GPL rules apply to it:
> the vendor needs to provide the ability to get source under the usual
> GPL rules.
>
> But when an application dynamically links with the (new) library, that
> application remains a "work of Target Code" and the GPL+Exception rules
> apply to any situation where that work is copied.

Thank you for your clarification.
I understand the new version of the library will be an "independent library".

Best Regards,
Hiraku Toyooka