On 07 November 2007 16:41, Joe Buck wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 07, 2007 at 09:20:21AM +0100, Emmanuel Fleury wrote:
>> Is there any progress in the gcc-plugin project ?
>
> Non-technical holdups. RMS is worried that this will make it too easy
> to integrate proprietary code directly with GCC.
>
> If proponents can come up with good arguments about how the plugin
> project can be structured to avoid this risk, that would help.
I don't understand: why wouldn't designing it so that they have to be
implemented as DSOs and hence are covered by the
anything-directly-linked-in-is-GPL'd clause do the job? Or is the concern
that people will write trivial marshalling plugins and ship all the data out
across a pipe or socket to some proprietary code and then only release source
for their shim layers?
cheers,
DaveK
--
Can't think of a witty .sigline today....
