From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 7999 invoked by alias); 18 Oct 2002 23:34:13 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gdb-help@sources.redhat.com; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-owner@sources.redhat.com Received: (qmail 7974 invoked from network); 18 Oct 2002 23:34:11 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mx1.redhat.com) (66.187.233.31) by sources.redhat.com with SMTP; 18 Oct 2002 23:34:11 -0000 Received: from int-mx2.corp.redhat.com (nat-pool-rdu-dmz.redhat.com [172.16.52.200]) by mx1.redhat.com (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id g9INDAw27939 for ; Fri, 18 Oct 2002 19:13:10 -0400 Received: from potter.sfbay.redhat.com (potter.sfbay.redhat.com [172.16.27.15]) by int-mx2.corp.redhat.com (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id g9INY9l30966 for ; Fri, 18 Oct 2002 19:34:09 -0400 Received: from localhost.redhat.com (romulus-int.sfbay.redhat.com [172.16.27.46]) by potter.sfbay.redhat.com (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id g9INY8D07509 for ; Fri, 18 Oct 2002 16:34:08 -0700 Received: from redhat.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by localhost.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id BABC23E0F; Fri, 18 Oct 2002 19:34:09 -0400 (EDT) Message-ID: <3DB09A71.9020502@redhat.com> Date: Fri, 18 Oct 2002 16:34:00 -0000 From: Andrew Cagney User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; NetBSD macppc; en-US; rv:1.0.0) Gecko/20020824 X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Daniel Jacobowitz Cc: Fred Viles , gdb@sources.redhat.com Subject: Re: libremote status? References: <3DA5D2A0.6277.13A0987@localhost> <20021011023049.GA8352@nevyn.them.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-SW-Source: 2002-10/txt/msg00144.txt.bz2 >> OTOH, according to the comment blocks at the start of every file you >> are releasing it under the GPL. Doesn't that mean that it can be >> incorporated into other GPL'ed projects pretty much without >> additional restriction? I obviously son't understand the issues >> here... > > > In general, yes; GNU projects, no. Remember the oft-mentioned > copyright assignment forms? It's FSF policy (usually) that the FSF > hold copyright on the entire source base of a GNU project like GDB. It's also sufficiently important for me to spend months (ongoing) slowly getting the (C) of the sim/ directory transfered to the FSF. > It's a reasonable policy; it gives the FSF close control over licensing > issues and centralizes copyright defense if it should become necessary. > I believe those are the reasons. > > [And I want to apologize again to Chris and others for my tone in that > quote; I do really appreciate the work they've done to get this project > released to the community.] Look on the bright side. At least you can now see what the devil I'm rambling on about when I say how GDB should be layered and modula and the target vector should be stackable. FSF (C) or not, that code couldn't be pulled into GDB proper (it would be equivalent to a HP merge .... :-( ), however, the experience gained can certainly be applied to GDB. Andrew