From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 10758 invoked by alias); 26 Jul 2009 09:56:14 -0000 Received: (qmail 10749 invoked by uid 22791); 26 Jul 2009 09:56:13 -0000 X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-2.1 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00 X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from mel.act-europe.fr (HELO mel.act-europe.fr) (212.99.106.210) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.43rc1) with ESMTP; Sun, 26 Jul 2009 09:56:08 +0000 Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by filtered-smtp.eu.adacore.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 03D12290040; Sun, 26 Jul 2009 11:56:06 +0200 (CEST) Received: from mel.act-europe.fr ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (smtp.eu.adacore.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id fe0wF6iIp4ee; Sun, 26 Jul 2009 11:56:05 +0200 (CEST) Received: from province.act-europe.fr (province.act-europe.fr [10.10.0.214]) by mel.act-europe.fr (Postfix) with ESMTP id 32620290037; Sun, 26 Jul 2009 11:56:05 +0200 (CEST) Received: by province.act-europe.fr (Postfix, from userid 525) id 247891648EE; Sun, 26 Jul 2009 11:56:05 +0200 (CEST) Date: Sun, 26 Jul 2009 09:56:00 -0000 From: Arnaud Charlet To: Florian Weimer Cc: Joe Buck , "gcc@gcc.gnu.org" Subject: Re: Compiling programs licensed under the GPL version 2 with GCC 4.4 Message-ID: <20090726095605.GA67379@adacore.com> References: <87y6qcfprf.fsf@mid.deneb.enyo.de> <20090726015725.GA29580@synopsys.com> <87y6qc0wmc.fsf@mid.deneb.enyo.de> <20090726093814.GD57052@adacore.com> <87prbnpyap.fsf@mid.deneb.enyo.de> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <87prbnpyap.fsf@mid.deneb.enyo.de> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.17 (2007-11-01) Mailing-List: contact gcc-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: Sender: gcc-owner@gcc.gnu.org X-SW-Source: 2009-07/txt/msg00535.txt.bz2 > GPLv2 (I tried to stress by writing "GPLv2-only"). Understood. > > If the latter (the license includes something like "either version 2 > > of the License, or (at your option) any later version"), then > > nothing prevents you from distributing the program under GPLv3+ > > instead of GPLv2+. > > Right, but we've got some stuff which is GPLv2-only, such as Git, > OpenOffice, OpenJDK, etc. I guess you should check with FSF lawyers in this case. I suspect that other clauses would apply. For example, assuming that the GCC 4.4 run-time is part of the OS (which is likely the case you described as far as I understand), then the GPLv2 OS exception clause would apply. But of course, I'm not a lawyer, so the best advice is to check with FSF directly, since this list is not the right media for it. Arno