Couldn't the plugin interface require a copyrighted passphrase to be
sent by the plugin when it registeres, and the passphrase can then
be licensed under the GPL. Thus, plugins that want to interface with
an official FSF gcc will have to be GPLed in order to talk to the
plugin interface, and we do
Joern Rennecke wrote:
Couldn't the plugin interface require a copyrighted passphrase to be
sent by the plugin when it registeres, and the passphrase can then
be licensed under the GPL. Thus, plugins that want to interface with
an official FSF gcc will have to be GPLed in order to talk to the
plu
To give it a bit more legal bite with respect to ruling out accidental
infringement, I suppose the passphrase could include a statement that
assures that the sending program is licensed under the GPL.
Another thing is that if it is considered possible that the passphrase
an be distributed as a sep
Hello Martin,
Martin Guy wrote:
On 9/26/08, Sergei Poselenov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Hello all,
I've built the above cross-compiler and ran the GCC testsuite.
Noted a lot of c++ tests failed with the same output:
...
terminate called after throwing an instance of 'int'
terminate called
On Mon, Sep 29, 2008 at 03:10:28PM +0100, Joern Rennecke wrote:
> To give it a bit more legal bite
There are no lawyers on this list (that I'm aware of). If you want to
discuss this, please contact the FSF or SC directly instead. It does
no good here.
--
Daniel Jacobowitz
CodeSourcery
You would not want a lawyer designing a compiler, so why...
Honestly, this is not helping. This is a technological forum and this
is not a technological issue but a legal one. So, even if you knew a
lawyer who wishes to help and work with the FSF to address the legal
issue, this is not the right m
On Mon, Sep 29, 2008 at 10:37 AM, Manuel López-Ibáñez
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> You would not want a lawyer designing a compiler, so why...
>
Oh.
I guess i'll just hang up my hat then ...
On Mon, Sep 29, 2008 at 02:54:26PM +0100, Joern Rennecke wrote:
> Couldn't the plugin interface require a copyrighted passphrase to be
> sent by the plugin when it registeres, and the passphrase can then
> be licensed under the GPL.
Please, let's stop this.
Hello,
I'm seeing a miscompilation on sel-sched branch that at first sight looks
related to IRA merge.
alias.c::anti_dependence disambiguates references to
(mem/c:DI (reg:DI 122 r122 [121]) [64 ivtmp.743+0 S8 A64])
and
(mem/c:DI (reg:DI 122 r122) [64 ivtmp.1640+0 S8 A64])
while there are no store
Alexander Monakov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote on 09/29/2008 01:34:12 PM:
> I'm seeing a miscompilation on sel-sched branch that at first sight looks
> related to IRA merge.
>
> alias.c::anti_dependence disambiguates references to
> (mem/c:DI (reg:DI 122 r122 [121]) [64 ivtmp.743+0 S8 A64])
> and
> (
Richard Sandiford wrote:
If PARENT_A is a parent of allocno A, propagate_allocno_info does
the equivalent of:
ALLOCNO_HARD_REG_COSTS(parent_a)[i] += ALLOCNO_HARD_REG_COSTS(a)[i]
which is what you'd expect from the comments. But after that,
should each update ALLOCNO_HARD_REG_COSTS(a)[i] be
On Mon, Sep 29, 2008 at 2:04 PM, Pat Haugen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> Does IRA support stack slot sharing described in the comment?
>
> We just got done walking through a failure with 200.sixtrack that looks
> like the same thing. The two insns involved are:
Looking into gcc.c-torture/execute
Joe Buck wrote:
On Mon, Sep 29, 2008 at 02:54:26PM +0100, Joern Rennecke wrote:
Couldn't the plugin interface require a copyrighted passphrase to be
sent by the plugin when it registeres, and the passphrase can then
be licensed under the GPL.
Please, let's stop this.
Actually the above is a
On Sat, 13 Sep 2008 23:05:27 -0500
"Aaron W. LaFramboise" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I'm happy to see that GRAPHITE it is in trunk now!
>
> I don't see any documentation of prerequisites in install.texi yet;
> perhaps we should add this so users can figure out what they need to
> do to get thi
The java-announce mailing list hasn't had a single message (according
to the archive on gcc.gnu.org) since 2001. Is there something wrong
with the archive, or is the list dead?
On Mon, Sep 29, 2008 at 10:30 PM, NightStrike <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> The java-announce mailing list hasn't had a single message (according
> to the archive on gcc.gnu.org) since 2001. Is there something wrong
> with the archive, or is the list dead?
We are very humble folk. Much has happen
16 matches
Mail list logo
