Does this license look familiar?

Does this license look familiar?

[Alex Schuilenburg]

http://www.rtems.com/license/LICENSE

The wording has been changed slightly in places so they talk in more 
general terms and they talk about executables rather than "works" (which 
IMHO implies that RTEMS libraries are not covered i.e. they are GPL'ed), 
but I still would consider this to be a derivative of the eCos license 
version 2.

Well, they could hardly distribute RTEMS under the eCos License could 
they? ;-)

-- Alex

Re: Does this license look familiar?

[Jonathan Larmour]

Alex Schuilenburg wrote:
> http://www.rtems.com/license/LICENSE
> 
> The wording has been changed slightly in places so they talk in more 
> general terms and they talk about executables rather than "works" (which 
> IMHO implies that RTEMS libraries are not covered i.e. they are GPL'ed), 
> but I still would consider this to be a derivative of the eCos license 
> version 2.
> 
> Well, they could hardly distribute RTEMS under the eCos License could 
> they? ;-)

Sorry to disappoint :), but this type of exception text was taken from 
GCC, not us, e.g.:
http://gcc.gnu.org/cgi-bin/cvsweb.cgi/gcc/libstdc%2b%2b-v3/libsupc%2b%2b/del_op.cc?rev=1.3&content-type=text/x-cvsweb-markup

They've modified it in a similar way to us, that's all.

Jifl
-- 
eCosCentric    http://www.eCosCentric.com/    The eCos and RedBoot experts
--["No sense being pessimistic, it wouldn't work anyway"]-- Opinions==mine