[License-discuss] Making the PHP FAQ generic

[Karl Fogel]

Luis is completely right that this question is independent of the FAQ
entry being discussed in this thread.  Could we please make it a new
thread if we're going to discuss it (but also not discuss it unless
we're going to write a FAQ entry about it, which I suggest we not do
because it's not actually frequently asked of OSI in my experience)?

-Karl

Chuck Swiger <chuck at codefab.com> writes:
>On Dec 7, 2012, at 1:26 PM, Lawrence Rosen wrote:
>> Are restrictions on the *use* or *results* of proprietary compilers
>> consistent with generating open source programs in that language?
>
>No.  However, compilation by itself is a mechanical task which performs no
>creative transformation.
>
>> Can the copying of binary code into an executable by the compiler
>> itself affect the
>> license on that executable?
>
>Sure.  If you link an executable against Oracle's client libraries to talk to
>their database, that executable includes proprietary code which would need to
>be appropriately licensed.
>
>> I have heard people ask if running a GPL compiler that includes GPL
>> libraries into a resulting program creates a GPL obligation for the
>> resulting program. I hope not!
>
>The GPL provides an exception for their compiler runtime library which
>permits this:
>
>  http://www.gnu.org/licenses/gcc-exception-faq.html
>
>Most or almost all other compilers also explicitly permit the use of
>the associated
>compiler runtime libraries with software under arbitrary licenses.
>End-users rarely
>encounter this because most platforms already ship with working versions of the
>compiler runtime and standard C/C++ libraries, and programs use
>dynamic linking to pull
>those in rather than needing to statically link them into the executable. [1]
>
>Regards,