[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: intel's Linux compiler w/ Debian

> A closer evaluation of the license is needed. Perhaps an installer
> package in non-free? Perhaps someone could purchase the Intel compiler for
> Debian and make it available for Debian packages? Perhaps the
> non-commercial version could be used if Debian was said to be a
> non-commercial organization? Perhaps, more discussion should be done in
> debian-legal.
>>> Either way gcc works just fine at $0 whereas the Intel is $399.
>> I'll drink to that!
> Intel's is $0 for evaluation (30 days), $0 for personal use (no
> distribution allowed?), and maybe even $0 if one person donates a copy of
> it to the Debian build system or another machine available to developers.
> An analysis of the license agreements found at
> http://www.intel.com/software/products/compilers/c60l/noncom.htm and
> http://www.intel.com/software/products/compilers/f60l/noncom.htm is
> needed (it seems to be the same license for non-commercial, evaluation,
> and the different license arrangements as there are several clauses for
> each case).
> Perhaps some Intel's other optimizing tools may be useful too?
> Oh, I haven't checked if these programs have been discussed before in
> debian-devel or if a rfp was assigned.

why should we care?  What is to gain by allowing users to compile items locally
with the Intel compiler?  The ONLY use I see for this is compatibility testing
to see that you do not depend on gcc features unknowingly.

Debian exists to promote free software.  We exist to promote the right to
freedom of software.  Supporting non-free is something we do reluctantly.  As a
group we are pragmatic and realize that sometimes getting your job done is
worth more than pride.  For a long time it was impossible to function without
Netscape and items like it.  Those days are rapidly dwindling.  Supplying hooks
to proprietary apps (especially ones with a monetary cost) is counter
productive and goes against what we stand for.

To support a compiler for one architecture just because it might produce faster
binaries seems fairly pointless.  We do not ship pentium optimized programs
because it has been demonstrated to be a fairly worthless procedure with more
costs than benefit.  Sure some programs do benefit and if the user desires
pentium-builder is there to help.


As I read this before sending I realize it sounds a little heated, flaming
even.  Please do not take my comments as a comment on you personally.  This is
a technical matter with technical arguments, ego should have nothing to do with

Reply to: