gnupic: Re: [gnupic] GCC port for PIC


Previous by date: 5 Apr 2006 12:04:26 +0100 Re: [gnupic] GCC port for PIC, Colm O' Flaherty
Next by date: 5 Apr 2006 12:04:26 +0100 Re: [gnupic] GCC port for PIC, Colm O' Flaherty
Previous in thread: 5 Apr 2006 12:04:26 +0100 Re: [gnupic] GCC port for PIC, Colm O' Flaherty
Next in thread: 5 Apr 2006 12:04:26 +0100 Re: [gnupic] GCC port for PIC, Colm O' Flaherty

Subject: Re: [gnupic] GCC port for PIC
From: Alex Holden ####@####.####
Date: 5 Apr 2006 12:04:26 +0100
Message-Id: <2CE05F2E-490B-4CF0-A492-55438B8DF470@linuxhacker.org>

On 5 Apr 2006, at 11:47, Colm O' Flaherty wrote:
> <quote>
> In addition, mere aggregation of another work not based on the Program
> with the Program (or with a work based on the Program) on a volume of
> a storage or distribution medium does not bring the other work under
> the scope of this License.
> </quote>
> Fair enough, but this doesn't seem to me to be entirely relevant  
> here.  This refers to someone creating a GNU PIC bundle (for  
> example), with both GPL'ed software and non GPL'ed software  
> aggregated on the same medium (CD).  All this clause says is that  
> in doing this, you do not cause the non-GPL'ed software to fall  
> under the GPL.

It is relevant because in this case "another work" (Microchip's C  
library with associated header files) is not, as far as I am aware,  
based in any way on "the Program" (gcc). If they haven't used any  
GPLed code to create their library then the GPL doesn't apply to it.  
Bundling gcc and their C library into one package is simply aggregation.

> What about the following, as quoted earlier?  This seems to be  
> directly applicable to the C30 compiler package, which has portions  
> not directly based on gnu cc (the linker scripts, etc).  These are  
> not distributed as separate works, but as part of the C30 compiler  
> package, which is based on GNU CC.  This implies "the distribution  
> of the whole must be on the terms of
> this License".. ie, the entire of Microchips C30 compiler package  
> must be on the terms of the GPL.

The GPL applies to GPLed source code and binaries created by  
compiling/assembling that source code. It doesn't apply to other  
programs that are bundled together with them in a single package.

> These requirements apply to the modified work as a whole.

That means simply a program/library that is licensed under the GPL.  
It doesn't mean a tarball, zipfile, Windows installer, etc. that  
contains both GPLed programs and non-GPLed programs.

> I'm not familiar with the ARM example.. Do you have more details?

Rowley sell an ARM development environment that bundles ARM GCC with  
their own proprietary C library, linker scripts, and IDE.

-- 
------------ Alex Holden - http://www.alexholden.net/ ------------
If it doesn't work, you're not hitting it with a big enough hammer



Previous by date: 5 Apr 2006 12:04:26 +0100 Re: [gnupic] GCC port for PIC, Colm O' Flaherty
Next by date: 5 Apr 2006 12:04:26 +0100 Re: [gnupic] GCC port for PIC, Colm O' Flaherty
Previous in thread: 5 Apr 2006 12:04:26 +0100 Re: [gnupic] GCC port for PIC, Colm O' Flaherty
Next in thread: 5 Apr 2006 12:04:26 +0100 Re: [gnupic] GCC port for PIC, Colm O' Flaherty


Powered by ezmlm-browse 0.20.