chak: > Yitzchak Gale: > >OK for the time > >being, but it would be really, really good to be able to compile > >ghc without gmp. > > Well, just go ahead and write an alternative portable & high- > performance implementation of Integer. > > >This idea of a Mac OS X binary with statically-linked > >gmp is nice, it is really convenient. But someone needs > >to completely clarify the license issues in that case, and > >make it completely clear to all users. > > I completely agree that we need to document the situation clearly. > Otherwise, I don't really see what the fuss is about. Most GHC users > don't care whether GMP is linked into their code (as its either only > used internally or has a GPL-compatible license anyway). > > If a company wants to distribute GHC compiled binaries of non-GPL > compatible code, well, they have to compile their own version of GHC > on the Mac that links GMP dynamically, and then, use that version of > GHC to link their final product. That is going to be a trivial task > compared to developing that product in the first place. So, who > cares?
I agree: there's a lot of effort here without an obvious demand. Do we know of anyone not using GHC commercially because the can't use GMP? -- Don _______________________________________________ Glasgow-haskell-users mailing list Glasgow-haskell-users@haskell.org http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/glasgow-haskell-users
