vik@lynx.uucp (Vikram Sohal) (09/20/89)
What's all this that I hear about people having to give away software products developed with G++ because the libraries are "copyleft" by GNU? If true, I think that this will deter many companies from using G++ to develop commercial products. ====================== Vik Sohal ======================
ccplumb@rose.waterloo.edu (Colin Plumb) (09/20/89)
In article <6224@lynx.UUCP> vik@lynx.UUCP (Vikram Sohal) writes: > What's all this that I hear about people having to give away software products > developed with G++ because the libraries are "copyleft" by GNU? If true, I > think that this will deter many companies from using G++ to develop commercial > products. Sigh... this is a well-worn issue. Yes, it has deterred people. The copyleft issue is not with G++ per se, but with the library of run-time functions it calls and G++ compiles calls to. The FSF claims its usual copyleft on any code incorporating the libraries, which means that anything linked with the libraries falls under the copyleft. This does *not* oblige anyone to give the code (object or source) away, but only obliges them to sell tham as a unit, and without further restricting the modification and resale privileges of the buyer. Persoanlly, I think it would be better to use the same terms as commercial compilers, which do not claim copyright on code containing the libraries, in order to maintain "holier-than-thou"ness if nothing else. But that's a subject on which there is some debate. -- -Colin