From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: "akbar A." To: gcc@gcc.gnu.org Subject: Re: Compiler for Red Hat Linux 8 Date: Thu, 19 Jul 2001 19:28:00 -0000 Message-id: <20010719212701.01235a27.syedali011@earthlink.net> References: <20010718214114.E9F0DF2B63@nile.gnat.com> <3B563EED.D55AB932@mvista.com> X-SW-Source: 2001-07/msg01396.html good/large example of this would be the ps2. laterz, -akbar A. ; http://vertexabuse.cjb.net On Wed, 18 Jul 2001 18:59:09 -0700 Michael Eager wrote: > dewar@gnat.com wrote: > > > > <<4. It's possible that, depending on how the IA64 situation goes, we > > might have to have code in the compiler which no-one outside Red > > Hat (and not on the appropriate NDA) can see until some point > > shortly before the release. I'm not sure how that could be made to > > work. > > >> > > > > I hope this does not imply that such versions of the compiler are released > > under NDA to organizations outside Redhat (since that would clearly violate > > the GPL). > > Unless I'm reading the GPL incorrectly, this does not violate the GPL. > > GPL does not require that code which depends on NDA info to be made public. > It says that if you produce a product using GPL code, that the source must be > made available to the recipient of the product and that the derived product > must be licensed under the GPL. It does not mandate that you publicly > distribute the product nor does it prohibit your distribution of the product > selectively. > > In the normal case, a microprocessor vendor enters into a development > agreement and NDA with a compiler developer. The compiler developer modifies > GCC as required and provides the compiler and source to the microprocessor > vendor. That product is covered by the GPL. The compiler developer is > prohibited under terms of the NDA from distributing any proprietary > information covered by the NDA, or anything derived from this info, which > is in this case is the compiler. > > In the normal course of events, the microprocessor under development is > released along with the compiler and other tools. At this time the sources > are made available to the recipients of the tools. The microprocessor vendor > (or the compiler developer, depending on how the development agreement > is written) may submit the source changes to the FSF or other public > source repository. > > While this may be convenient and desirable, the GPL does not require > it, nor does it require that the source be made available to anyone > other than the recipient of the tools. > > Please feel free to correct me if I've misunderstood part of the GPL. > > -- > Michael Eager eager@mvista.com 408-328-8426 > MontaVista Software, Inc. 1237 E. Arques Ave., Sunnyvale, CA 94085