Re: libstdc++/4418: License is unclear

Re: libstdc++/4418: License is unclear

[Phil Edwards]

The following reply was made to PR libstdc++/4418; it has been noted by GNATS.

From: Phil Edwards <pedwards@disaster.jaj.com>
To: ben.hutchings@roundpoint.com
Cc: gcc-gnats@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: Re: libstdc++/4418: License is unclear
Date: Tue, 2 Oct 2001 17:57:42 -0400

 On Fri, Sep 28, 2001 at 02:22:32PM -0000, ben.hutchings@roundpoint.com wrote:
 > >Description:
 > None of the documentation specifies what the license is (so far as I can
 > see). There is a file included in the documentation called COPYING which
 > is a copy of version 2 of the GPL, but none of the other documentation
 > refers to this.
 
 Yep.  The docs are under the FDL, and I need to go back and make that clear.
 Thanks for bringing this to our attention!
 
 
 > There is clearly some confusion in the free software community as to
 > exactly what the license is. I have seen references to a "Runtime GPL" or
 > "relaxed GPL", neither of which terms I have seen before. The Freshmeat
 > entry simply says the license is "GPL".
 
 Freshmeat needs more categories.  The GPL-with-runtime-exception has been
 around for quite a while now.
 
 > The header files refer to the GPL and the COPYING file, but then state an
 > exception to it. Unlike the GPL, this is loosely worded and its meaning is
 > not absolutely clear.
 
 You would need to take this up with the FSF.
 
 
 Phil
 
 -- 
 If ye love wealth greater than liberty, the tranquility of servitude greater
 than the animating contest for freedom, go home and leave us in peace.  We seek
 not your counsel, nor your arms.  Crouch down and lick the hand that feeds you;
 and may posterity forget that ye were our countrymen.            - Samuel Adams

Re: libstdc++/4418: License is unclear

[pme]

Synopsis: License is unclear

State-Changed-From-To: open->closed
State-Changed-By: pme
State-Changed-When: Thu Oct  4 13:17:24 2001
State-Changed-Why:
    
    Fixed with
    http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/libstdc++/2001-10/msg00059.html

http://gcc.gnu.org/cgi-bin/gnatsweb.pl?cmd=view&pr=4418&database=gcc

libstdc++/4418: License is unclear

[ben.hutchings]

>Number:         4418
>Category:       libstdc++
>Synopsis:       License is unclear
>Confidential:   no
>Severity:       serious
>Priority:       medium
>Responsible:    unassigned
>State:          open
>Class:          doc-bug
>Submitter-Id:   net
>Arrival-Date:   Fri Sep 28 07:26:00 PDT 2001
>Closed-Date:
>Last-Modified:
>Originator:     ben.hutchings@roundpoint.com
>Release:        gcc-3.0.1
>Organization:
>Environment:

>Description:
None of the documentation specifies what the license is (so far as I can see). There is a file included in the documentation called COPYING which is a copy of version 2 of the GPL, but none of the other documentation refers to this.

There is clearly some confusion in the free software community as to exactly what the license is. I have seen references to a "Runtime GPL" or "relaxed GPL", neither of which terms I have seen before. The Freshmeat entry simply says the license is "GPL".

The header files refer to the GPL and the COPYING file, but then state an exception to it. Unlike the GPL, this is loosely worded and its meaning is not absolutely clear. I am led to believe that its intention is to allow software to be compiled and dynamically linked with libstdc++ without imposing any restrictions on distribution of the executable software. This is not spelled out, and I believe it should be (or, if my understanding is wrong, then the real intentions should be spelled out). Ideally, I think that both the headers and the documentation should refer to a single file containing the modified version of the GPL that  applies (or multiple files, if there multiple licenses involved).
>How-To-Repeat:
1. Search the distributed documentation for a mention of the license.
2. Google for "libstdc++ license".
>Fix:

>Release-Note:
>Audit-Trail:
>Unformatted: