Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!uwm.edu!carroll1!derek From: derek@carroll1.cc.edu (Derek Inksetter) Newsgroups: alt.religion.computers Subject: Re: Cheapest way to Unix program developement Keywords: Unix, GNUCC, GCC, 386 Message-ID: <1086@carroll1.cc.edu> Date: 16 Jan 90 22:43:26 GMT References: <1271@island.uu.net> <2711@draken.nada.kth.se> <634@foster.avid.oz> <108@zds-ux.UUCP> Reply-To: derek@carroll1.cc.edu (Derek Inksetter) Organization: Carroll College Dept. of Artificial Stupidity Lines: 48 In article <108@zds-ux.UUCP> gerry@zds-ux.UUCP (Gerry Gleason) writes: >In article peter@ficc.uu.net (Peter da Silva) writes: >>|Mere aggregation of another unrelated program with this program (or its >>|derivative) on a volume of a storage or distribution medium does not bring >>|the other program under the scope of these terms. > >>> For heaven's sake, guys. The only real difference between gcc and anyone >>> else's C compiler is that you don't have to pay for gcc and you get source. > >>This is not true, *IF* you include any library routines covered under the >>GPL, and if linking with a library is not considered "Mere aggregation... >>on a volume of storage". Various people associated with the FSF have stated >>that linking is not "mere aggregation", therefore you can't use any GNU >>libraries if you want to retain control over the distribution of your code. > And the following was posted to alt.sources recently: Article 1002 of alt.sources: Path: carroll1!uwm.edu!cs.utexas.edu!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!ucbvax!bloom-beacon!athena.mit.edu!bjaspan From: bjaspan@athena.mit.edu (Barr3y Jaspan) Newsgroups: alt.sources Subject: A Dynamic Object library for C Message-ID: <1990Jan16.014131.18734@athena.mit.edu> Date: 16 Jan 90 01:41:31 GMT Sender: news@athena.mit.edu (News system) Reply-To: bjaspan@athena.mit.edu (Barr3y Jaspan) Organization: Massachusetts Institute of Technology Lines: 867 The following is a library that implements "dynamic objects" in C. A dynamic object is basically an array that resizes itself automatically as elements are added to it (thus freeing the programmer from having to deal with it). It is similar the GNU's opstack code, except my library isn't covered by the gnu license. The code is not complicated, and you could probably hit ten people with a rope on a crowded street that could have written it as well. However, I actually got around to doing it right and testing and documenting it. . . . This is really getting funny. Now, there are people rewriting libraries to avoid the GNU license. And look where it's coming from, too. derek -- .sig file closed for repairs--No thru traffic