Hi Cynthia,
> Hello, my name is Cynthia and I am a Supply Chain Risk Management
> Analyst at NASA. NASA is currently conducting a supply chain
> assessment of gfortran. As stated in Sections 208 and 514 of the
> Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2022, Public Law 117-103,
> enacted March 15, 2022
with the recent announcement that rust is supported by gcc
has it been taken into consideration that the draconian (non-free-compatible)
requirements of the rust Trademark make the distribution of the gcc
compiler Unlawful?
https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=1013920
if the word
Should this question be posed to the Linux distribution that NASA is using?
Thanks, David
On Sun, Jul 17, 2022 at 4:56 AM Thomas Koenig via Gcc wrote:
>
> Hi Cynthia,
>
> > Hello, my name is Cynthia and I am a Supply Chain Risk Management
> > Analyst at NASA. NASA is currently conducting a sup
> Am 17.07.2022 um 17:29 schrieb lkcl via Gcc :
>
> with the recent announcement that rust is supported by gcc
> has it been taken into consideration that the draconian (non-free-compatible)
> requirements of the rust Trademark make the distribution of the gcc
> compiler Unlawful?
>
>http
Hi Luke,
On Sun, Jul 17, 2022 at 04:28:10PM +0100, lkcl via Gcc wrote:
> with the recent announcement that rust is supported by gcc
There is just a discussion about whether and how to integrate
(portions) of the gccrs frontend into the main gcc repository. Nobody
claims that means the rust progra
On Sun, Jul 17, 2022 at 5:25 PM Richard Biener
wrote:
> > if the word "rust" is entirely removed from the gcc source code then
> > there is no problem whatsoever (recall: "iceweasel").
>
> We’ll call it gust.
love it! the puns i would have recommended would have been based
on "iron oxide".
plea
On Sun, Jul 17, 2022 at 5:31 PM Mark Wielaard wrote:
>
> Hi Luke,
>
> On Sun, Jul 17, 2022 at 04:28:10PM +0100, lkcl via Gcc wrote:
> > with the recent announcement that rust is supported by gcc
>
> There is just a discussion about whether and how to integrate
> (portions) of the gccrs frontend in
Hi Luke,
On Sun, Jul 17, 2022 at 06:06:45PM +0100, lkcl via Gcc wrote:
> given that gcc is *entirely implementing* the rust programming
> language (from scratch) and given that that implementation is not in
> fact implemented by the Rust Foundation (the Trademark Holders
> themselves) but by the g
On Sun, Jul 17, 2022 at 6:41 PM Mark Wielaard wrote:
> I think you are misinterpreting when you need a trademark license for
> usage a word mark in an implementation of a compiler for a programming
> language.
i'm aware of the difference. i mentioned this in my first reply to Richard
(and cover
> Should this question be posed to the Linux distribution that NASA is using?
Yes, most likely. But exactly how Free Software fits into the
Buy America Act (what she's talking about) is less than clear.
> just as with the Java Trademark, you as developers can say "gust is
> compatible with the rust language" but you *cannot* say "gust is
> compatible with rust".
Note that trademarks are adjectives, not nouns (and only apply to specific
nouns, so I'm not sure what you mean here.
> I think you are misinterpreting when you need a trademark license for
> usage a word mark in an implementation of a compiler for a programming
> language. Note that gcc used to come with a full implementation of the
> Java programming language, compiler, runtime and core library
> implementation
ah. right. sorry Mark i missed something.
whilst you *as developers* have been in contact with the Rust Foundation
and presumably have private assurances that your use of the Trademarked
word "rust" is Authorised under License (through either implication or by
actual explicit approval) absolutely
On Jul 17, 2022, Mark Wielaard wrote:
> None of that required a trademark license because the usage of the
> word java was just for compatibility with the java programming
> language.
"just for compatibility" is an defense that applies to copyrights, but
AFAIK it doesn't apply to trademarks.
in
On Jul 17, 2022, Richard Biener via Gcc wrote:
> We’ll call it gust.
How about "giust"? (GNU Implementation of...)
so that it sounds like https://just-lang.org/
--
Alexandre Oliva, happy hackerhttps://FSFLA.org/blogs/lxo/
Free Software Activist GNU To
On Sun, 17 Jul 2022 14:18:40 EDT
Richard Kenner via Gcc wrote:
> > Should this question be posed to the Linux distribution that NASA is using?
>
> Yes, most likely. But exactly how Free Software fits into the
> Buy America Act (what she's talking about) is less than clear.
If these bureaucrati
> If these bureaucratic parasites (but I repeat myself) don't want to
> use GCC, or Clang, then they can write their own compiler suite from
> scratch. Doubt that's going to happen, so this "investigation" is
> simply yet another frivilous waste of taxpayer dollars.
I won't blame this on bureaucra
Snapshot gcc-13-20220717 is now available on
https://gcc.gnu.org/pub/gcc/snapshots/13-20220717/
and on various mirrors, see http://gcc.gnu.org/mirrors.html for details.
This snapshot has been generated from the GCC 13 git branch
with the following options: git://gcc.gnu.org/git/gcc.git branch
Hi Luke,
On Sun, Jul 17, 2022 at 07:29:22PM +0100, lkcl wrote:
> whilst you *as developers* have been in contact with the Rust Foundation
> and presumably have private assurances that your use of the Trademarked
> word "rust" is Authorised under License (through either implication or by
> actual e
sorry, Mark, you're still misunderstanding, on multiple levels
and in so many ways i am having a hard time tracking them
all.
i don't feel that i've been heard, and consequently do not
feel comfortable continuing the conversation, especially
given that i have other priorities.
if you had asked qu
> Normal use of a word isn't something that Trademarks prevent.
In general, no, but what it prevents is using the word in a way that
would produce confusion with an "official" use of that mark. If the
word that constitutes the mark is too general, then the trademark
shouldn't have been granted.
21 matches
Mail list logo
