Re: GCC 4.4 run-time license and non-GPLv3 compilers

2009-12-07 Thread Matthias Klose
On 22.11.2009 19:49, Florian Weimer wrote: * Matthias Klose: On 21.11.2009 06:20, Florian Weimer wrote: * Steve Langasek: It's been suggested to me that it might help Debian move forward on this issue if I provide some background on why Canonical has chosen to not regard this issue as

Re: GCC 4.4 run-time license and non-GPLv3 compilers

2009-11-22 Thread Matthias Klose
On 21.11.2009 06:20, Florian Weimer wrote: * Steve Langasek: It's been suggested to me that it might help Debian move forward on this issue if I provide some background on why Canonical has chosen to not regard this issue as critical for Ubuntu. My personal impression is that Debian does not

Re: GCC 4.4 run-time license and non-GPLv3 compilers

2009-11-22 Thread Florian Weimer
* Matthias Klose: On 21.11.2009 06:20, Florian Weimer wrote: * Steve Langasek: It's been suggested to me that it might help Debian move forward on this issue if I provide some background on why Canonical has chosen to not regard this issue as critical for Ubuntu. My personal impression is

Re: GCC 4.4 run-time license and non-GPLv3 compilers

2009-11-22 Thread Steve Langasek
Hi Florian, On Sat, Nov 21, 2009 at 01:20:15PM +0100, Florian Weimer wrote: It's been suggested to me that it might help Debian move forward on this issue if I provide some background on why Canonical has chosen to not regard this issue as critical for Ubuntu. My personal impression is

Re: GCC 4.4 run-time license and non-GPLv3 compilers

2009-11-21 Thread Florian Weimer
* Steve Langasek: It's been suggested to me that it might help Debian move forward on this issue if I provide some background on why Canonical has chosen to not regard this issue as critical for Ubuntu. My personal impression is that Debian does not view this issue as critical, either.

Re: GCC 4.4 run-time license and non-GPLv3 compilers

2009-11-20 Thread Steve Langasek
Hi all, On Fri, Apr 10, 2009 at 02:35:28PM +0200, Florian Weimer wrote: Starting with version 4.4, the FSF the licenses the GCC run-time library with a special exception: | Under Section 7 of GPL version 3, you are granted additional | permissions described in the GCC Runtime Library

Re: GCC 4.4 run-time license and non-GPLv3 compilers

2009-08-20 Thread Matthias Klose
On 16.08.2009 10:50, Luk Claes wrote: Matthias Klose wrote: On 29.04.2009 04:49, Florian Weimer wrote: * Florian Weimer: I've asked the FSF for a clarification (the second time, the first clarification resulted in the Java bytecode exception). Until we know for sure how to interpret the

Re: GCC 4.4 run-time license and non-GPLv3 compilers

2009-08-16 Thread Luk Claes
Matthias Klose wrote: On 29.04.2009 04:49, Florian Weimer wrote: * Florian Weimer: I've asked the FSF for a clarification (the second time, the first clarification resulted in the Java bytecode exception). Until we know for sure how to interpret the exception, it's probably best not to

Re: GCC 4.4 run-time license and non-GPLv3 compilers

2009-07-20 Thread Matthias Klose
On 29.04.2009 04:49, Florian Weimer wrote: * Florian Weimer: I've asked the FSF for a clarification (the second time, the first clarification resulted in the Java bytecode exception). Until we know for sure how to interpret the exception, it's probably best not to make GCC 4.4 the default