Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!rutgers!apple!ames!xanth!nic.MR.NET!ns!hughes
From: hughes@ns.network.com (Jim Hughes x1676)
Newsgroups: comp.lang.c++
Subject: Re: C++ 2.0 pricing and licensing policy
Message-ID: <1481@ns.network.com>
Date: 11 Jul 89 15:32:00 GMT
References: <8723@thorin.cs.unc.edu> <6590188@hplsla.HP.COM>
Sender: hughes@ns.network.com (Jim Hughes x1676)
Reply-To: hughes@ns.UUCP (Jim Hughes x1676)
Organization: Network Systems Corporation
Lines: 14

In article <6590188@hplsla.HP.COM> jima@hplsla.HP.COM (Jim Adcock) writes:
>Another approach, if you have anything near to a mainstream machine, is
>to lobby your vendor for g++ support.  It seems silly and counterproductive
>for companies to have or have access to good, well ported copies of gnu
>stuff, and still force customers to figure out how to port/compile it
>on their machines.  There should be good, easy ways for customers to
>get already ported amd compiled versions from vendors [including the
>source, of course :-]  Anon ftp, for example.

I would pay for that service (porting to my machine) especially
if the source is still provided. Is that against copyleft?

Jim
hughes@network.com