Why Clang

Wojciech Puchar wojtek at wojtek.tensor.gdynia.pl
Wed Jun 20 06:54:33 UTC 2012

> Here[1] we can read a program linking agains a gpl v3 library should be released
> under the gplv3 too. However, the only concern would be when the program is
> implicitly linked against libgcc right? Well, there's even an
> exception[2] for this.
this is exactly how i understand that. Anyway DragonFly BSD developers 
(which is BSD licenced) don't have any problems and just use latest gcc.

> I'm not saying moving to clang is a bad idea.

I am saying this. Moving to worse compiler is a definitely bad idea.

This is not a place of politics. As GPLv3 doesn't prevent it from being 
used in FreeBSD and is better - it should be used. It's simple.

If clang would be better - it should be used.

> Can anyone provide an example of viral propagation of the license if we compile
> the base system with a gpl v3 gcc?
there are none probably.

Before actually testing it i believed we move to clang because it is 
better compiler AND and supported a move. Good lesson to test first and 
don't believe, even with FreeBSD.

More information about the freebsd-questions mailing list