On Sun, May 25, 2003 at 12:22:15AM -0400, Nathanael Nerode wrote: > The GCC source tarball contains, well, a lot of things. The following are > FDLed with invariant sections or cover texts and so non-free: > [snip] > > 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. ;-) If it just contains a .so request, it's uncopyrightable, since that contains no originality, which is a requirement (at least in the US) for copyrightablity. In that case, it would be 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 See http://lists.debian.org/debian-legal/2002/debian-legal-200211/msg00287.html for why the GFDL is still not ok, even without invariant sections and cover texts. The libiberty manuals are non-free. > 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.) See man(7). -- Brian M. Carlson <sandals@crustytoothpaste.ath.cx> 0x560553e7 "Let us think the unthinkable, let us do the undoable. Let us prepare to grapple with the ineffable itself, and see if we may not eff it after all." --Douglas Adams
Attachment:
pgp01lVvIMkou.pgp
Description: PGP signature