Here[1] we can read a program linking agains a gpl v3 library should be released
under the gplv3 too. However, the only concern would be when the program is
implicitly linked against libgcc right? Well, there's even an
exception[2] for this.
this is exactly how i understand that. Anyway DragonFly BSD developers
(which is BSD licenced) don't have any problems and just use latest gcc.
I'm not saying moving to clang is a bad idea.
I am saying this. Moving to worse compiler is a definitely bad idea.
This is not a place of politics. As GPLv3 doesn't prevent it from being
used in FreeBSD and is better - it should be used. It's simple.
If clang would be better - it should be used.
Can anyone provide an example of viral propagation of the license if we compile
the base system with a gpl v3 gcc?
there are none probably.
Before actually testing it i believed we move to clang because it is
better compiler AND and supported a move. Good lesson to test first and
don't believe, even with FreeBSD.
_______________________________________________
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
