[uClibc] buildroot gcc-4 proposed changes

Rob Landley rob at landley.net
Tue May 10 04:25:25 UTC 2005


On Tuesday 10 May 2005 12:16 am, Manuel Novoa III wrote:
> On Mon, May 09, 2005 at 10:36:40PM -0400, Rob Landley wrote:
> > On Monday 09 May 2005 05:32 pm, Manuel Novoa III wrote:
> > > > > Soon means by end of May.  Since I'm hoping to raise contributions
> > > > > for hospice with it, I do not plan for it to be LGPL initially.
> > > > > Once a (currently unspecified) target is reached, then I'd LGPL it.
> > > > > Until then, it would be free for noncommercial use by all and for
> > > > > commercial use by a few (individuals/companies that had contributed
> > > > > to uClibc development in some meaningful way).
> > > > >
> > > > > Manuel
> > > >
> > > > Then I would propose to stick w/ the current implementation, add what
> > > > is missing to it (all float/double/long double missing from SuSv3,see
> > > > math patches from me in bugs.uclibc.org), put your implementation
> > > > parallely to the current, so that anyone can choose the one that fits
> > > > her/his licensing requirements, until the new one will become LGPL
> > > > too.
> > >
> > > Absolutely not.  Why should I care about commercial users who do not or
> > > have never supported uClibc development?  If they want to use the old
> > > stuff, then they can go to the trouble of integrating it and
> > > maintaining it themselves.  I don't see why I should make it easy for
> > > them.
> >
> > I don't think this counts as "mere aggregation".  Can you patch it into
> > uClibc and distribute the result if it's not under a compatible license?
>
> And just to reiterate since it seems to have been dropped from the
> quoted section, this is yet another attempt to generated charitable
> donations for hospice in Toni's name.

I'm not arguing with this.  It's a good cause, and you have every right to do 
this with your code, and good luck to you.  I just don't want legal 
strangeness to potentially inhibit our future ability to enforce the license 
against third party violators.

> I have no intention of limiting non-commercial use and plan to LGPL
> the code once an amount is raised equivalent to what I would have
> charged for the work.

Again, good luck with this.  Hope it fares better than all the previous 
attempts...

> Manuel

Rob



More information about the uClibc mailing list