On Aug 31, 2012, at 5:24 PM, Wojciech Meyer <[email protected]> wrote:
> Jim Jagielski <[email protected]> writes: > >> On Aug 31, 2012, at 2:27 PM, "C. Bergström" <[email protected]> wrote: >> >>> On 09/ 1/12 01:25 AM, Jim Jagielski wrote: >>>> Are you suggesting that FreeBSD does not allow the inclusion of ANY >>>> ALv2 library under its ports directory? >>> I'll give you the benefit of the a doubt one more time... >>> >>> stdcxx ends up linking against *EVERY* C++ application if it's used >>> in the default compiler setup. (Which is what I was trying to >>> achieve) That includes *******GPLv2******** software in ports. Get >>> it? >>> >> >> I notice you did not answer my question... It's a simply question >> and requires a simple yes or no. Are you suggesting that FreeBSD does >> not allow the inclusion of ANY ALv2 library under its ports directory? >> >> Thx. > > Hi again, > > the point is that the stdcxx is rudimentary for the C++ applications, > and if they are GPL then can't use stdcxx as a standard C++ > library. Again, this is simply untrue. GPLv2 and GPLv3 have exceptions for system libraries... Considering that the entire argument is based on the above false assumption, everything else is moot.
