Re: GCC 4.4 run-time license and non-GPLv3 compilers
* Steve Langasek:
> It's been suggested to me that it might help Debian move forward on this
> issue if I provide some background on why Canonical has chosen to not regard
> this issue as critical for Ubuntu.
My personal impression is that Debian does not view this issue as
critical, either. Switching the GCC default hasn't happened for other
reasons.
We also ignored a similar issue in the GPLv1 case, but there is far
less code affected, of course.
> The FSF has not contacted Canonical requesting a resolution,
The FSF generally licenses their code under GPL, version x "or later",
so they are not affected by this at all.
Developers who license their code under the GPL, version 2, and no
later version, have a reason to complain. The OpenSSL and KDE issues
are a precedents showing that we cannot rely on the system library
exception for linking to the run-time library here. So the project's
position will be slightly inconsistent, but I think we can live with
that.
Reply to: