On Fri, 29 Feb 2008 09:02:51 -0800 Andrew Pinski [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
On Fri, Feb 29, 2008 at 8:54 AM, David Chisnall
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I composed a long reply to Nicola's email, but this makes my point
far better than I did. A few things:
- LLVM is Free Software.
No it
On 29.02.2008, at 18:33, Hubert Chathi wrote:
How is it not Free software?
Its not Free Software according to the FSF definition, which everyone
refers to when you are taking part in a mailinglist which contains
GNU or GNA in its name.
http://www.fsf.org/licensing/essays/free-sw.html
On 1 Mar 2008, at 15:27, Helge Hess wrote:
On 29.02.2008, at 18:33, Hubert Chathi wrote:
How is it not Free software?
Its not Free Software according to the FSF definition, which
everyone refers to when you are taking part in a mailinglist which
contains GNU or GNA in its name.
On Fri, Feb 29, 2008 at 5:02 PM, Andrew Pinski [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
- LLVM is already producing faster code than GCC.
No it does not. It also supports less targets than GCC does which is
the most important thing for free software really.
If it's so good, people will port it. Even
