Re: [ANNOUNCEMENT] GDB 7.0 release process created

[Mark Wielaard <mark@klomp.org>]

On Tue, 2009-09-22 at 15:29 +0200, Jonas Maebe wrote:
> On 22 Sep 2009, at 14:58, Mark Wielaard wrote:
> 
> > If the gdb binary as conveyed to the user depends on being  
> > codesigned by
> > a particular authorization key, then that should be part of the
> > corresponding source code that the user receives. So then the signing
> > authorization keys would be available for any rebuild gdb binary that
> > the user creates.
> 
> Isn't that only as of GPLv3 and later? (the whole "Installation  
> Information" discussion) Apple's gdb is based on an old (GPLv2) fork.

You would have to aks FSF legal for details of whether not offering part
of the corresponding source code is allowed under GPLv2 vs GPLv3. But it
seems obvious to me that if you cannot build a functionally equivalent
working binary from the sources as provided, then you are not in
compliance of offering the complete source code of the executable work.
So I would assume the requirement to provide it to the user is
equivalent under both versions. The GPLv3 text just makes it a bit more
explicit that this is the intent it seems.

Cheers,

Mark