"Alfred M. Szmidt" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > So Richard talks explicitly about the _goal_ of the GPL, and he does > this immediately before listing a number of projects that set out to > create proprietary projects, and then were forced by their use of > GPLed software to license them under the GPL. > > Which is to keep GPL software free, in this case, it kept GCC free.
Reality check. GCC did not have a C++ frontend previously. So it did not "keep" what constituted GCC "free", but rather added something new to it. > And one way for MCC to comply was to license their changes under the > GPL. Again, thank you for proving my point. You really love that sentence, even though it is hilariously wrong time and again. -- David Kastrup, Kriemhildstr. 15, 44793 Bochum _______________________________________________ gnu-misc-discuss mailing list gnu-misc-discuss@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnu-misc-discuss
