Why Clang

Antonio Olivares olivares14031 at gmail.com
Wed Jun 20 15:56:00 UTC 2012

On Wed, Jun 20, 2012 at 9:44 AM, Wojciech Puchar
<wojtek at wojtek.tensor.gdynia.pl> wrote:
>> licensed gcc or b) A maintained and current GPLv3 gcc with GPLv3
>> licensed libc.
> FreeBSD doesn't use GNU libc. am i missing something?

No they don't :)

It is good that they don't.  Why?  Because of the changes from GPLv2
to GPLv3.  Everything created with this license requires that
everything be built with it :(  This is why it can't be used in base.
You can still use gcc, but it will not be in base.  Many folks have
tried to explain this, but you compare things that will most likely
give the edge to gcc over clang.

Take for instance the linux kernel.  It is still GPLv2 and will most
likely continue there.  Why?  Many developers don't like the change to
GPLv3.  See



I have seen many arguments and have been  part of many flames/flaming
GNU since I also use Linux based OS.  I like FreeBSD and wondered why
they also allow GPL stuff, but then I realized that it was in ports
and the move to avoid gcc is in the base.  You  can still use the gcc,
but it(FreeBSD system will be built with Clang).  The move has been
made and I see that it was necessary to avoid many GNUisms that take
place.  Politics, and Religious things aside, you can also see the



I have some friends that develop software.  They had released it under
GNU umbrella.  Later on, other folks were taking advantage and not
giving back as the license requires.  There was little to no way to
enforce the license, he decided to  move to other license that
protects his work and let others use it was well with little to no
strings attached.  He know uses the CDDL which is also an Open Source
License.  He can give you many reasons as to why the GPLv3 is the
wrong way to go.  I can ask him for these and other reasons at your



More information about the freebsd-questions mailing list