From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 7048 invoked by alias); 20 Apr 2012 16:02:44 -0000 Received: (qmail 7036 invoked by uid 22791); 20 Apr 2012 16:02:42 -0000 X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-1.8 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,MSGID_FROM_MTA_HEADER,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE,RCVD_IN_HOSTKARMA_YE,TW_SG X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from blu0-omc3-s10.blu0.hotmail.com (HELO blu0-omc3-s10.blu0.hotmail.com) (65.55.116.85) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.43rc1) with ESMTP; Fri, 20 Apr 2012 16:02:28 +0000 Received: from BLU0-SMTP71 ([65.55.116.72]) by blu0-omc3-s10.blu0.hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.4675); Fri, 20 Apr 2012 09:02:27 -0700 Message-ID: Received: from DeadDuck ([76.64.44.194]) by BLU0-SMTP71.phx.gbl over TLS secured channel with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.4675); Fri, 20 Apr 2012 09:02:26 -0700 From: Bill Pringlemeir To: Thierry Moreau CC: Per-Arnold.Blaasmo@atmel.com, crossgcc@sourceware.org Subject: Re: License text in finished built toolchain? References: <4F911B40.3000002@atmel.com> <4F916E4A.3030708@connotech.com> Date: Fri, 20 Apr 2012 16:02:00 -0000 In-Reply-To: <4F916E4A.3030708@connotech.com> (Thierry Moreau's message of "Fri, 20 Apr 2012 10:10:18 -0400") User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/23.2 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" X-IsSubscribed: yes Mailing-List: contact crossgcc-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: crossgcc-owner@sourceware.org X-SW-Source: 2012-04/txt/msg00022.txt.bz2 Per Arnold Blaasmo wrote: >> Do we need to have the license files in the finished build tree? >> Should crosstool-ng copy those in to the finished tree? >> What about crosstool-ng's license? >> Do we need to add that to the finished built toolchain? >> Do anyone have any thought on this? On 20 Apr 2012, thierry.moreau@connotech.com wrote: > I don' se the point for crossgcc developers/maintainers to delve into > these issues for you. Their time is best used elsewhere. I don't think it is a bad idea for crosstool-ng to copy a licence file(s) to the finished tree. I don't see one for anything but 'ltrace' in my trees in '/debug-root/usr/share/doc/ltrace/COPYING'. CT-NG is already putting a compressed build log there. There is no 'choice' of licence. It is GPL/LGPL/GCC and having those files present in the finished tree makes sense doesn't it? I don't think it is a pressing matter, but I wouldn't say that Per Arnold's suggestion was *not* worth any attention. Actually, I am surprised that the GCC, etc build files haven't installed a licence file somewhere... but maybe I missed something in the finished tree. Debian/Ubuntu provide on in /usr/share/doc/gcc-4.4-base/copyright. I guess getting the constituent package licences right for an aggregate license might be an issue; if it is a simple 'cp' how could it not be worth the time? fwiw, Bill Pringlemeir. -- For unsubscribe information see http://sourceware.org/lists.html#faq