Linked by Thom Holwerda on Thu 12th Jan 2012 22:54 UTC
Permalink for comment 503082
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 05/22/13 22:23 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/22/13 13:38 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/22/13 13:30 UTC, submitted by JRepin
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/21/13 22:06 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/21/13 21:45 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/21/13 15:53 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/20/13 22:43 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/20/13 21:50 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/19/13 23:15 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/19/13 23:11 UTC, submitted by Drumhellar
More News »
Sponsored Links



Member since:
2006-01-24
The project needs an up to date and maintainable compiler/toolchain that meets the projects requirements and with GCC past 4.2.1/binutils past 2.17 that is no longer possible. It's a much bigger issue than just some companies having an issue with GPL'd code.
Stop with the bs, the ONLY reason the BSD's didn't upgrade past 4.2.1 is because of the GPLv3 licence and as others have already stated this was because of companies supporting BSD having a 'no GPLv3 policy' (most likely due to the TIVO-ization clause).
Also this relates to what the BSD's ship with, all later GCC versions have been readily available through ports so those who have no problem with GPLv3 and wants to enjoy benefits of later versions like better optimization/faster compilation can get them.