On 12-11-2012 13:51, Lukasz Sokol wrote: > On 11/11/2012 08:48, Reinier Olislagers wrote: >> On 11-11-2012 6:55, microcode-ytc+ihgo...@public.gmane.org wrote: >>> On Sat, Nov 10, 2012 at 07:57:09PM +0100, Jonas Maebe wrote: > > On 10 >>> Nov 2012, at 19:38, microcode-ytc+ihgo...@public.gmane.org wrote: > > > On >>> Sat, Nov 10, 2012 >>> at 06:20:29PM +0100, Reinier Olislagers wrote: > >> Has anybody tried >>> the Pathscale debugger on Linux x64/FreeBSD? > >> > >> I haven't myself, >>> just heard that they open sourced their compiler suite. > >> > >> A >>> download page seems to be here: > >> <snip> >> [2] >> http://www.pathscale.com/pdf/PathScale_Software_License.pdf > > See in that file, article 3.1 and 3.2. In short, Pathscale's portions cannot > be used however you want.
Yep, 3.1 says the license is assigned to you as a person and that you can use it for internal business purposes. How this translates to a compiler is a bit weird. IMO, if you're a software house, writing code and compiling it would be your internal business purpose, so that would be fine. That 3.1 is perhaps a sort of protection against people reselilng the Pathscale stuff as their own product or something?!? However, any GPL-licensed software would trump that part of the agreeement anyway... 3.3 is covered in your other mail. BTW, I noticed some threads on the Phoronix forum going on about GPL code being injected into compiled code, which would "contaminate" the entire binary with the GPL license, so no chance to create a MIT/BSD etc licensed binary. Haven't looked into it further because I only wanted to point out the debugger could perhaps be a useful alternative to gdb... Thanks, Reinier _______________________________________________ fpc-pascal maillist - fpc-pascal@lists.freepascal.org http://lists.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/fpc-pascal
