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

Re: GCC's manpage refers to sections that aren't in the manpage

On 5/6/07, MJ Ray <mjr@phonecoop.coop> wrote:
Zack Weinberg <zackw@panix.com> wrote:
> GCC's manpages are mechanically generated from its info files.  We
> asked the FSF how to apply the GFDL and were told that the *entire
> collection of manpages* counted as the Work, so it was okay to put the
> Invariant Sections in separate manpages.  See
> http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc/2001-11/msg00311.html et seq. [...]

Do the gcc man pages now make it clear that the entire collection of
manuals are the work and say which other man pages contain the Invariant
Sections and the License?

I know they contain cross-references to the other man pages, I'm not
sure how clear they make it that the entire collection is the work.
Joseph Myers is the person to ask; I've cc:ed him.

Also, the FDL seems to require the Invariant Sections be included in the
copy (section 4H), not merely in the Document.  What did I miss?

I have no idea.  We took the FSF's licensing compliance guy's word for
it.  I suppose it might not be a bad idea to copy some of the text at
the URL above into debian/copyright.

I dislike the FDL because of all these complexities and stange interactions
when an FDL'd manual accompanies GPL'd software.  GPL the manuals!

I entirely agree with you, but the GCC steering committee is of the
opinion that there is no chance of persuading RMS to sign off on it.
[I do not know whether they ever tried, but I think they're right.
Joseph, again, might know more.]


Reply to: