Re: D Symbol Demangling

Eli Zaretskii
2006-04-25T03:35:48Z

[-- Warning: decoded text below may be mangled, UTF-8 assumed --]
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2112 bytes --]

> Date: Mon, 24 Apr 2006 16:53:28 -0400
> From: Daniel Jacobowitz <drow@false.org>
> Cc: gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com
>
> On Sat, Apr 22, 2006 at 12:24:24AM +0200, Thomas Kühne wrote:
> > I've no problem with assigning the copyright of the demangler to the FSF if
> > the license issue - as you noted, using more than one license might cause
> > problems - can be solved.
> >
> > The GPL with linking exception would seem to be the best solution for all.
> > (taken from /usr/portage/licenses/GPL-2-with-linking-exception)
> >
> > | As a special exception, the copyright holders of this library give you
> > | permission to link this library with independent modules to produce an
> > | executable, regardless of the license terms of these independent modules,
> > | and to copy and distribute the resulting executable under terms of your
> > | choice, provided that you also meet, for each linked independent module,
> > | the terms and conditions of the license of that module. An independent
> > | module is a module which is not derived from or based on this library. If
> > | you modify this library, you may extend this exception to your version of
> > | the library, but you are not obligated to do so. If you do not wish to do
> > | so, delete this exception statement from your version.
> >
> > <followed by the GPL text>
>
> I don't know what permissions we need to generate new code under this
> license; does anyone else know? Do we need to check it with the FSF?
> They're usually reasonable about such things, but obviously they prefer
> the stronger GPL when possible.

In general, I think that exceptions like that are okay as long as they
don't interfere with distribution under the GPL. The copyright holder
can decide to release the software under any license she chooses, and
it should be okay with the FSF as long as the license doesn't prevent
the freedoms required by the GPL.

But it's a good idea to check with the FSF nonetheless.

Perhaps DJ could help with advice: the DJGPP project's license is the
GPL with an exception, so DJ probably already ``been there, done
that''.