On Nov 29, 2007 11:13 PM, Joe Buck <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > On Thu, Nov 29, 2007 at 01:08:26AM +0100, Manuel López-Ibáñez wrote: > > On 29/11/2007, Ben Elliston <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > Actually, I wanted to provide some examples, but I couldn't easily > > > > find a list of companies providing commercial support for GCC. > > > > Shouldn't we have such a list in the website in a prominent place? > > > > > > This is explained in the gcc/SERVICE file. > > > > > > > Perhaps we should have that link in our website + a list specific to GCC. > > > > By the way, the link is broken. The correct link seems to be > > http://www.fsf.org/resources/service > > > > I can send a patch, but I think it would be better if we linked to our > > own http://gcc.gnu.org/support page and from there to wherever the FSF > > wants us to link. That way we could include and update ourselves the > > information specific to gcc. > > Unfortunately, that's an area that the FSF wants tight control over; > they would be especially cheesed off if we linked to a consultant's page > and the consultant also advertised his/her ability to support proprietary > compiler development. > > But the page on fsf.org is outdated and mostly-useless; people are > unlikely to find it. It should be possible to do something better and > still meet the FSF's requirements (which mainly are that FSF sites don't > promote proprietary software or link to pages that do).
So maybe we should instead drop the SERVICE file completely. Richard.
