I've been running around various mailing list archives for a while and I can't see a definative answer, just assumptions on either side.
The question is this: Can we statically link libgcc.a into our non-[L]GPL C application and distribute the binary without GPL-infecting it?
Our compiler is GCC 3.1.1. I've seen some exemptions go into the license of the libgcc in 3.2 to allow this, but I don't think these exemptions were 'backported' to 3.1.
I'm really interested in an official legal position on this.
(Using the dynamic libgcc_s.so is not out of the question, but external dependancies can be a genuine compatability problem (libgcc amongst them, from googling around) and we'd like to minimise them. We're not shipping libs that care about the things that a dynamic libgcc abstracts away, so a dynamic libgcc is more of a liability than a benefit here.)
One of our targets is win32, where (AFAIK) libgcc is static anyway...
Regards, --Adam -- Adam D. Moss . ,,^^ adam@xxxxxxxx http://www.foxbox.org/ co:3 "Tell people something they know already and they will thank you for it.i Tell them something new and they will hate you for it."
