Re: Now it's my compiler!

Hyman Rosen wrote:
> The Ghost In The Machine wrote:
>> OK, I'm missing something here.
>> [2] GPL code + proprietary compiler = non-distributable binary
>> precisely *why* is this the case?
> 
> It's not the case. All that the do***ent says is that since you
> can't distribute a non-free compiler, you just say what compiler
> you use and that's enough.

You don't have to say anything at all about your compiler.

> The GPL could have made distributing
> the compiler a requirement, but that would have so hampered free
> software as to make it useless, so the FSF didn't do that.

Could'a, Would'a, Should'a -- but didn't.
He. He.

>> completely *ignores* the issue of a sup****t API
> 
> I think that usually falls under the system software exception
> of the GPL. But tricks are played with this. For example, AdaCore
> releases their "public GPL" version of their Ada compiler with a
> runtime library licensed solely under the GPL, so any programs
> built with it that use the runtime can only be distributed as free
> software under the GPL. If you pay them for sup****t, they give you
> a runtime library licensed under a GPL + program exception rule,
> which allows you to distribute it linked into non-free programs.
> (All of it is licensed under the GPL, so a paying customer is free
> to redistribute it to others, but I doubt any of them bother.)

Sincerely,
Rjack :)