Joern Rennecke <amyl...@spamcop.net> writes: > Quoting Ian Lance Taylor <i...@google.com>: >> Code that is neither Target Code nor an Independent Module is code >> that has never been involved with gcc, and the license does not cover >> it. > > There is a lot of Target code that is, per definition, not an > Independent Module because it does not use the GCC runtime library.
Yes. >> The license does not prohibit combining Target Code or >> Independent Modules with other code, so it is permitted. > > No, this is not how Copyright works. In the absence of a license you may > not distribute the resulting work. By my reading, you do have permission. It's right there in the license. You are arguing that the license must grant explicit permission for combining with other code which is not covered in any way by the license. I don't see why that is required. You already have permission to do anything you like. However, that said, I think it would be reasonable to ask the SFLC if the definition of "Independent Module" could be clarified to make clear that code which neither requires the runtime library, nor uses an interface provided by the runtime library, is an independent module. I think that is the intent of the definition of "Independent Module", but I agree that it is not clear from the wording. Ian
