Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!sdd.hp.com!usc!apple!agate!headcrash.Berkeley.EDU!lyman From: lyman@headcrash.Berkeley.EDU (Lyman S. Taylor) Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac.programmer Subject: Re: Gnu C Compiler for MPW Unchained! Message-ID: <1990Dec12.041624.3564@agate.berkeley.edu> Date: 12 Dec 90 04:16:24 GMT References: <1990Dec5.202855.6434@eng.umd.edu> <1990Dec11.140812.1003@chinet.chi.il.us> Sender: lyman@ocf.berkeley.edu Organization: UC Berkeley Open Computing Facility Lines: 56 In article <1990Dec11.140812.1003@chinet.chi.il.us> laird@chinet.chi.il.us (Laird J. Heal) writes: > >Here, however I would like to note that the GNU Public License (which Apple >is probably subscribing to - I have not bothered to ftp COPYING from the gcc >distribution at apple) requires a vendor to make ALL source code available. >Apple is saying that the binaries they are distributing require the sources >for gcc to be compiled by the MPW C compiler. It would seem to me, then, >that they are incorporating the MPW C compiler as a part of their port of >gcc, and they should release the sources to MPW C as an integral part of >the distribution. I think you should carefully read the file COPYING before making statements as to what it does and does not say. This has got to be one of the most misread documents I know of ( mainly because people read what the want to see. It's actually a straightforward document.. as legal documents go :-) ). No, I'm an not a lawyer and I do not think you have to be a lawyer to understand the License. COPYING ( for those who don't know it is the part of the GNU Public License that gives some people "fits" ) would require in this case, since gcc is the program in question, that all the code, including the mods, to gcc be made available. Passing this code through a "tool", in this case MPW C, does not free the MPW C source. People seem to get the wrong impression that the GNU Public License "frees" everything it touches. It does NOT. Using gnu-emacs to edit your source code does not free your code. Since the license covers all FSF "tools" there was ( and I guess, still is ) some confusion about the use of gcc since it includes header files. This is why there's the special exemption clause about header files in COPYING. Therefore, using gcc to compile your code does NOT free your code, anymore than eamcs would. Taking the FSF code and incorporating it into your program or modifying the code and redistributing it are a different story. If you want incorporte then its "lawyer time" since this is where copyrights get fuzzy. If you modify and redistribute then, this is a clear violation. I would also like comment on this thread of: "What does Apple mean by doing this port.... " I would like to than Stan for doing the port. ( Especially since he probably knew that he see responses along these lines ). I really doubt this was an "Apple" project. However it's nice to know that Apple would help "deliver" a nice tool to have once it has been created. Lyman