Hello,
I have questions about the GCC Runtime Library Exception.
When an equipment vendor distributes an update of shared gcc runtime
libraries (e.g. libgcc_s.so, libstdc++.so) to the shipped equipment
and when the equipment has applications which are dynamically linked to
older release of the sh
|
EEPT2019
March 24-25, 2019 in Hangzhou, China
Welcome to EEPT2019
Conference Name:2019 International Conference on Energy Engineering and Power
Technology (EEPT2019)
Date: March 24-25, 2019 Location: Hangzhou(Hilton Hangzhou Xiaoshan), China
Website: http://www.eept2019.org
This conference
On Wed, 27 Feb 2019 at 09:06, wrote:
>
> Hello,
>
> I have questions about the GCC Runtime Library Exception.
>
> When an equipment vendor distributes an update of shared gcc runtime
> libraries (e.g. libgcc_s.so, libstdc++.so) to the shipped equipment
> and when the equipment has applications whi
> I have questions about the GCC Runtime Library Exception.
Note that nobody can give you definitive answers to questions like this
since they haven't been litigated. So any answer is an "educated guess".
Having said that ...
> When an equipment vendor distributes an update of shared gcc runtime
* Richard Biener:
>> Since the introduction of GNU Property notes this is (sadly) no longer
>> the correct way to iterate through ELF notes. The padding of names and
>> desc might now depend on the alignment of the PT_NOTE segment.
>> https://sourceware.org/ml/binutils/2018-09/msg00359.html
>
> I
On 27 Feb 2019, at 12:41, Richard Kenner wrote:
>
> Remember that, from the perspective of copyright law, executing a program is
> making a "copy"
> of that program.
Has that (rather extreme) view been litigated?
> Remember that, from the perspective of copyright law, executing a
> program is making a "copy"
> of that program.
>
> Has that (rather extreme) view been litigated?
That's actually not extreme, but pretty accepted. And yes, that has
been litigated. And you can see that in the G
On 2/27/19 6:20 AM, Richard Kenner wrote:
> That's actually not extreme, but pretty accepted. And yes, that has
> been litigated. And you can see that in the GPL in the definition of
> "propagate": the exclusion of executing it on a computer wouldn't be
> necessary if that weren't considered a co
Hello,
A Kitware employee, Ben Boeckel, would like to contribute a patch of
approximately 100 lines. There is also potential for Kitware employees to
contribute more code in the future. Could you please send us the
appropriate form for signature?
Thanks,
Adrien
Adrien Beaudet
*Associate Contrac
Sent offline to Adrien.
- David
On Wed, Feb 27, 2019 at 10:14 AM Adrien Beaudet
wrote:
> Hello,
>
> A Kitware employee, Ben Boeckel, would like to contribute a patch of
> approximately 100 lines. There is also potential for Kitware employees to
> contribute more code in the future. Could you pl
On 2/26/19 11:18 AM, Michael Matz wrote:
Hi,
On Tue, 26 Feb 2019, Richard Biener wrote:
get_build_id_1 (struct dl_phdr_info *info, size_t, void *data)
{
Isn't this all a bit silly? We could simply encode the svn revision, or
maybe even just some random bytes generated once in stage1 at buil
> That depends on your local copyright law. Some, like the US, have
> language saying that copies necessary for usual operation are *not*
> covered under copyright.
I'm refering to US law. Where, precisely, is the language you are
referring to? Note that there are two separate issues:
(1) Wheth
On 27 Feb 2019, at 18:37, Richard Kenner wrote:
>
> 1) Whether executing a program is considered making a copy under
> copyright law.
I had a look through some of the published judgements, and it's clear that in
the US at least copying into RAM (for whatever purpose, and provided the copy
has
Hi!
On Mon, Feb 25, 2019 at 06:32:53PM +, Michael Matz wrote:
> On Thu, 21 Feb 2019, Segher Boessenkool wrote:
> > > That said, the "bug" in the case we're seeing, is that asmcons rewrote
> > > all of "input"'s pseudos, and it should be more careful to not create
> > > rtl with illegal const
14 matches
Mail list logo
