Linked by Thom Holwerda on Sun 10th May 2009 22:22 UTC
Permalink for comment 362796
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
News
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/18/13 21:06 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/18/13 7:37 UTC
Linked by fran on 05/18/13 1:38 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/17/13 23:35 UTC, submitted by kragil
Linked by MOS6510 on 05/17/13 22:22 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/17/13 22:15 UTC, submitted by Tom
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/16/13 21:41 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/16/13 17:04 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/16/13 13:17 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/16/13 12:06 UTC
More News »
Sponsored Links



Member since:
2006-01-24
cycoj wrote:
-"I think the debian move to eglibc cannot be seen as a move away from the gnu software. Firstly, eglibc has the same licence as glibc, the LGPL or lesser GNU public licence. Secondly, eglibc follows the same copyright assignment rules as glibc, i.e. the FSF owns the copyright to eglibc as well."
Yeah, I guess Thom was desperately looking for a trend of 'projects leaving gnu' or something. Also Freebsd wanting to drop gcc for llvm isn't exactly a shocker since afaik they haven't upgraded gcc from 4.2.1 (due to not liking gplv3 iirc).
Either way it's great that a large and complex project like an operating system is focusing on using llvm since that will expose alot of the functionality that llvm/clang needs in order to mature into a stable and complete solution and hopefully it will also help speed development up a bit.