From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 18982 invoked by alias); 2 Mar 2008 14:00:31 -0000 Received: (qmail 18973 invoked by uid 22791); 2 Mar 2008 14:00:30 -0000 X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from rock.gnat.com (HELO rock.gnat.com) (205.232.38.15) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.31) with ESMTP; Sun, 02 Mar 2008 14:00:07 +0000 Received: from localhost (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by filtered-rock.gnat.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id CFFBE2AA20F; Sun, 2 Mar 2008 09:00:05 -0500 (EST) Received: from rock.gnat.com ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (rock.gnat.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with LMTP id Z3N2X4UNqhgx; Sun, 2 Mar 2008 09:00:05 -0500 (EST) Received: from [127.0.0.1] (nile.gnat.com [205.232.38.5]) by rock.gnat.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 91DF92AA15B; Sun, 2 Mar 2008 09:00:05 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <47CAB2D6.5090401@adacore.com> Date: Sun, 02 Mar 2008 14:00:00 -0000 From: Robert Dewar User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.12 (Windows/20080213) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Nicholas Mc Guire CC: Doug Evans , Lokesh Gupta , gdb@sourceware.org, rms@gnu.org Subject: Re: Tracepoints functionality for local targets References: <21b011a40802260027r596c2c0bt96339538b8e5cc92@mail.gmail.com> <20080226131031.GA9105@caradoc.them.org> <47CA9144.6040209@adacore.com> In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-IsSubscribed: yes Mailing-List: contact gdb-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-owner@sourceware.org X-SW-Source: 2008-03/txt/msg00016.txt.bz2 Nicholas Mc Guire wrote: > of course you need to be sure about the GPL V2 license being issued by the > copyrigth holder and not mearly me claiming this - but there is a > fundamental step from "requirement of verified free-software compliant > copyright" and requirement of assigning copyright to the FSF - the > argument of clean and assured copyright definitly does not legitimate this > policy - or atleast at this point I don't see why - could you explain > this in more detail ? This is established policy which is not about to be changed, and it is not appropriate to discuss it on this list. I will send a private message.