🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <Jan07.125226.7157@parst1.uucp> martin@parst1.uucp (Martin Walker) writes:

   Does the GNU public license imply that anything one writes and
   subsequently compiles using gcc (as opposed to any other C
   compiler) falls within the scope of the license? That is to say,
   would the author of the program then be forfeiting his normal
   copyright, thus prohibiting him from selling the binary software
   for gain? Would he be obliged to make available the source code of
   his software at, at most, some nominal distribution fee?

Mere compilation with the compiler does not affect the copyright
status of your program.  

Linking your program with a library is a different matter.  The
trivial libraries distributed with GCC give you unrestricted
permission to distribute if they are linked in to an executable.
Libraries distributed under the GPL cannot be distributed in linked
form without forcing free distribution of the rest of the program.
Libraries distributed under the GLPL allow non-free distribution in
linked form, but only if you distribute (or make otherwise available)
the complete library, complete with any modifications you have made to
it, and enough mechanism to allow the user to relink your program with
the library should they change the library.  (Usually distributing the
.o's of the program is enough to satisfy this requirement.)

Also worth noting is that bison includes FSF source code in the
parsers it generates; bison-generated parsers are thus copylefted, and
thus are fully subject to the GPS.

The GPL dees not place restrictions on distribution fees with only one
exception: if you distribute source separately from binaries, the
source must be shipped at a nominal fee to any third party.  The
binaries can be shipped at any fee you choose, and, if you are
shipping only source or source and binaries at once, you can charge
whatever people will pay you.

	-mib