On Wed, Apr 28, 2010 at 02:28:57PM +0200, Tristan Gingold wrote: > > Hi Tristan, > > > > If I understand correctly what GHDL does when it generates an > > executable: the executable is linked with the ghdl run-time library > > (GRT). But GRT is under the GPL license. So the generated executable > > is GPL too. > > That's correct. > > > With others GCC front-ends there are exceptions appended to the GPL > > license for run-time library portions of the compilers. > > > > For example with Gnu Ada there is the GMGPL exception: > > http://gnuada.sourceforge.net/pmwiki.php/Main/GMGPL > > > > Is the GPL licensing of GRT is a deliberate choice ? > > Yes. > > > Perhaps I am mistaking about the licensing of the generated > > executable... I need clarifications :) > > I thought that nobody would need to distribute a ghdl binary. Do you really > need to do that ?
I can imagine it being useful. What's the harm? // Jakob _______________________________________________ Ghdl-discuss mailing list [email protected] https://mail.gna.org/listinfo/ghdl-discuss
