Bug#193787: An attempt to document how to make a free GCC *source* tarball.
The GCC source tarball contains, well, a lot of things. The following are
FDLed with invariant sections or cover texts and so non-free:
Entire contents of INSTALL/
fastjar/fastjar.texi
fastjar/fastjar.info
fastjar/grepjar.1
fastjar/jar.1
Entire contents of libstdc++-v3/docs
Entire contents of gcc/doc
(EXCEPT install.texi2html and include/texinfo.tex, which aren't useful by
themselves)
gcc/ada/gnat_rm.info
gcc/ada/gnat_ug_unx.info
gcc/ada/gnat_ug_vms.info
gcc/ada/gnat_ug_vxw.info
gcc/ada/gnat_ug_wnt.info
gcc/ada/gnat_rm.texi
gcc/ada/gnat_ug_unx.texi
gcc/ada/gnat_ug_vms.texi
gcc/ada/gnat_ug_vxw.texi
gcc/ada/gnat_ug_wnt.texi
gcc/f/*.texi (9 files)
gcc/f/intdoc.in
gcc/f/g77.info
gcc/f/g77.1
gcc/java/gcj.texi
gcc/java/gcj.info
gcc/java/*.1 (8 files)
gcc/treelang/treelang.texi
I'd also be suspicious of
gcc/ada/gnat-style.texi
gcc/ada/gnat-style.info
since they have a slightly unclear license status (These are the last two
texi and info files.)
Note also that gcc/cp/g++.1 is just a pointer to gcc.1, so it's useless
without a gcc.1. But it is free. ;-)
The following appear to be FDLed with no invariant sections, no front cover
texts, and no back cover texts, which might be OK according to debian-legal,
although there are some other complaints about the GNU FDL:
libiberty/libiberty.texi
libiberty/obstacks.texi
The following appear to be verbatim copying only (!) (they're derived from
the web pages, which are verbatim copying only) and so non-free:
BUGS
FAQ
GNATS
bugs.html
faq.html
gnats.html
(I didn't include license text files since Debian allows them to be
verbatim-only. I also didn't include a few files in libiberty whose license
terms were clearly in error and will hopefully be fixed soon.)
Accordingly I suggest that y'all delete all of the above, except possibly the
libiberty manuals, from the FSF tarballs before putting it into the .orig for
the next gcc-m.n source packages. And then see what needs to be done to the
Debian diff to keep it building and installing. :-( Obviously the 'doc'
packages won't build, but probably tweaks will be needed to get the general
rules to work with the man pages missing. Or new man pages stuffed in with
the diff, which might be simple and based on gcc --help et. al. (Actually,
that might be easiest in terms of not messing with the installation rules; if
I knew nroff, I'd write them today, but I don't.)
--Nathanael
Reply to: