Re: [PATCH, Modula-2 (C/C++/D/F/Go/Jit)] (Register spec fn) (v2)

[Gaius Mulley <gaius.mulley@southwales.ac.uk>]

Matthias Klose <doko@ubuntu.com> writes:

> On 08.07.19 23:19, Matthias Klose wrote:
>> On 14.06.19 15:09, Gaius Mulley wrote:
>>>
>>> Hello,
>>>
>>> here is version two of the patches which introduce Modula-2 into the
>>> GCC trunk.  The patches include:
>>>
>>>   (*)  a patch to allow all front ends to register a lang spec function.
>>>        (included are patches for all front ends to provide an empty
>>>         callback function).
>>>   (*)  patch diffs to allow the Modula-2 front end driver to be
>>>        built using GCC Makefile and friends.
>>>
>>> The compressed tarball includes:
>>>
>>>   (*)  gcc/m2  (compiler driver and lang-spec stuff for Modula-2).
>>>        Including the need for registering lang spec functions.
>>>   (*)  gcc/testsuite/gm2  (a Modula-2 dejagnu test to ensure that
>>>        the gm2 driver is built and can understands --version).
>>>
>>> These patches have been re-written after taking on board the comments
>>> found in this thread:
>>>
>>>    https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2013-11/msg02620.html
>>>
>>> it is a revised patch set from:
>>>
>>>    https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2019-06/msg00220.html
>>>
>>> I've run make bootstrap and run the regression tests on trunk and no
>>> extra failures occur for all languages touched in the ChangeLog.
>>>
>>> I'm currently tracking gcc trunk and gcc-9 with gm2 (which works well
>>> with amd64/arm64/i386) - these patches are currently simply for the
>>> driver to minimise the patch size.  There are also > 1800 tests in a
>>> dejagnu testsuite for gm2 which can be included at some future time.
>> 
>> I had a look at the GCC 9 version of the patches, with a build
>> including a make
>> install. Some comments:
>
> A look at the licenses:
>
> libgm2/p2c/*: GPL 3+
> libgm2/libiso/*: LGPL 2.1+
> libgm2/libmin/libc.c: GPL 3+
> libgm2/liblog/*: LGPL 2.1+
> libgm2/libpim/*: LGPL 2.1+
> libgm2/libpim/Selective.c: GPL 3+
> libgm2/libpim/wrapc.c: GPL 3+
> libgm2/libpth/*: LGPL 2.1+
>
> gcc/gm2/ulm-lib-gm2/* GPL 3+, Ulm copyright holder?
>
> gcc/gm2/gm2-libs/*.def GPL 3+
> gcc/gm2/gm2-libs/Break.def LGPL 2.1+
> gcc/gm2/gm2-libs/*.mod LGPL 2.1+
> gcc/gm2/gm2-libs/Builtins.mod GPL 3+
>
> I didn't look at everything in gcc/gm2, however it's not clear for me when a
> file is LGPL or GPL.  And at least in gm2-libs, it seems to be mixed randomly.
> First I thought all definition modules were GPL, and implementation modules were
> LGPL, but that's not the case.
>
> So currently all code linked with the runtime libs becomes GPL 3+?
>
> For the ulm lib, the files mention the Ulm university as the copyright holder,
> but it's not clear which license these files had before they were imported.
>
> libgm2 seems to be mostly LGPL except for two files. Intended?
>
> Matthias

Hi Matthias,

many thanks for the analysis.  I've now:

  *  removed all gnu pth code and rewritten the coroutine libraries to
     use libgcc/gthr.h.
  *  removed all Univ Ulm libraries
  *  changed all remaining library code to use GPL3+ gcc runtime
     extensions
  *  checked all compiler code is GPL3

(on the master branch of gm2)

[I've still working on the testsuite]


regards,
Gaius