Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!aplcen!haven!uvaarpa!murdoch!astsun9.astro.Virginia.EDU!gsh7w
From: gsh7w@astsun9.astro.Virginia.EDU (Greg S. Hennessy)
Newsgroups: comp.unix.i386
Subject: Re: System V and Xenix compatibility
Message-ID: <1990Jul11.160204.27713@murdoch.acc.Virginia.EDU>
Date: 11 Jul 90 16:02:04 GMT
References: <17032@haddock.ima.isc.com> <40800022@uicsl.csl.uiuc.edu>
Sender: news@murdoch.acc.Virginia.EDU
Organization: University of Virginia
Lines: 29

In article <40800022@uicsl.csl.uiuc.edu> brando@uicsl.csl.uiuc.edu writes:
#Correct me if I'm wrong, but I thought the whole point of the gcc compiler
#was that if you use it, the code you write is also covered by their licensing
#agreement which, from a recent thread in this newsgroup, says the resultant
#binaries must also be given away free??  

Two misconceptions here. 

The first is that if you use FSF code, then you must make any code you
release "free" (more on this in a minute.) Just using gcc or emacs is
not using FSF code. With g++, if you include the g++ library, then FSF
takes the position that you are including g++ code, and the resulting
binarys must be "free". Currently there is not gnu c library, and I
have been told (but not verified) that you must explicitly add the
-lg++ flag to the g++ command line to include the g++ library (i.e. it
won't add FSF code automatically, you have to ask for it.)

The second misconception is what "free" is. You are allowed to charge
whatever your heart desires for "free" code, you simply cannot prevent
the redistribution of your code. You are allowed to charge me 1
million dollars for the binary and code of your new WizMaker-123
product, but then I can put the code available to the world by
anonymous ftp.

--
-Greg Hennessy, University of Virginia
 USPS Mail:     Astronomy Department, Charlottesville, VA 22903-2475 USA
 Internet:      gsh7w@virginia.edu  
 UUCP:		...!uunet!virginia!gsh7w