On Mon, 2011-05-16 at 15:34 -0700, Khem Raj wrote: > On Mon, May 16, 2011 at 1:48 PM, Saul Wold <saul.w...@intel.com> wrote: > > On 05/16/2011 12:51 PM, Richard Purdie wrote: > >> > >> On Mon, 2011-05-16 at 10:08 -0700, Khem Raj wrote: > >>> > >>> On Mon, May 16, 2011 at 7:57 AM, Saul Wold<saul.w...@intel.com> wrote: > >>>> > >>>> On 05/15/2011 11:19 PM, Khem Raj wrote: > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> On May 14, 2011, at 5:23 PM, Saul Wold<s...@linux.intel.com> wrote: > >>>>> > >>>>>> From: Saul Wold<s...@linux.intel.com> > >>>>>> > >>>>>> This proposes to move the YAFFS2-utils, older clutter-1.4 > >>>>>> and older GCC version (4.3.3 and 3.4.4) as they are unused > >>>>>> and currently unbuildable. > >>>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> Are we left with any GPLv2 version of gcc after this ? > >>>>> > >>>> Khem, > >>>> > >>>> Is not having a GPLv2 version of gcc an issue? For the non-gplv3 > >>>> version, my > >>>> understanding is to have an installed user-space for oe-core for a > >>>> non-development system, therefore gcc is not an issue. > >>>> > >>> > >>> there are certain parts of gcc which go onto target e.g. libgcc libstdc++ > >> > >> These have specific license exceptions allowing non-gpl code to use them > >> as system libraries though? > >> > > Richard is correct, there are exception for the runtime parts of GCC. > > Sorry Khem, I was not catching to original gist of the question. > > exceptions yes but they are not same exceptions between GPLv2 and GPLv3 gcc.
Is there a problem here though? What impact are you concerned with? Cheers, Richard _______________________________________________ Openembedded-core mailing list Openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org http://lists.linuxtogo.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openembedded-core