Re: gpl, gdb and wigglers.dll

Andrew Cagney
2001-05-07T13:20:00Z

> Hi,
>
> There is a piece of gdb code (I suppose in ser-ocd.c), which loads
> and uses proprietary dll. It seems to me that it is this is a violation
> of the GPL. So, I am wondering which of the following is true (and why):
>
> 1. It is not a violation of GPL.
> 2. It is not a violation of GPL 2, it will be prohibited in future GPL
> versions.
> 3. It is a violation of GPL and it will be removed ASAP.
> 4. It is a viilation of GPL, however, nothing is going to be done about
> it.
> 4. It is wigglers-specific exclusion from GPL requirements and it is
> going to stay this way.
> 6. It is gdb-specific exclusion from GPL requirements and it is going to
> stay this way.
> 7. None of the above.

If someone were to distribute a GDB binary along with wiggler.dll and
_not_ make freely available the source to both the wiggler.dll and GDB
then there would likely be a GPL violation.

Looking at ser-ocd.c, it probably shouldn't be included in the standard
*ppc* targets simply because it is a waste of space - it is very
windows specific.

Anyway, your e-mail eludes to a more important question - should GDB
even include the source to code that allows it to use proprietary debug
interfaces? I'm guessing, but I suspect that the current pratice has
been that such code should be included as it makes GDB accessible to a
wider set of users. At the same time, however, it also precluding the
possibility of a dll vendor directly benefiting by distributing a GDB
binary.

Andrew