On 03/10/2011 04:04 PM, Joel Sherrill wrote:
On 03/10/2011 07:25 AM, Sebastien Bourdeauducq wrote:
Hi,
Thanks for the quick reply! I though this licensing issue was resolved.
On Thu, 2011-03-10 at 18:46 +0530, Shakthi Kannan wrote:
The reply from Red Hat legal on the licensing is at:
http://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/legal/2010-October/001401.html
So, anything using newlib cannot be accepted into Fedora due to
licensing issues?
Putting it this way it not true.
Read again the cited link again:
"Also noteworthy would be that if the non-free components
were removed/replaced/relicensed, the result would still be unacceptable
to Fedora because of the GPL-incompatible + GPLv2+ combination."
The GPL/GPLv2+ parts are the linux parts (and unused by RTEMS). the non
free parts would have to be inspected if they are used by RTEMS.
(AFAICT, none of them are)
That's funny... cygwin-1.7.8-1.fc14.noarch.rpm is available
Where did you get this from? Would be news to me, Fedora shipped cygwin.
which has newlib in it.
Someone from LatticeMico32 or their support dealers in Bengaluru,
India contacted me regarding the toolchain, but, he didn't understand
anything about Fedora, free/open source to understand about the
licensing problem.
Nothing unusual, ...
Ralf
_______________________________________________
http://lists.milkymist.org/listinfo.cgi/devel-milkymist.org
IRC: #milkymist@Freenode
Twitter: www.twitter.com/milkymistvj
Ideas? http://milkymist.uservoice.com
