Hi Jonathan, > -----Ursprüngliche Nachricht----- > Von: Jonathan Wakely <jwakely.gcc@xxxxxxxxx> > Gesendet: Montag, 11. Mai 2020 13:58 > An: Keil, Jochen (SE T SO PE T 1 2) <jochen.keil@xxxxxxxxxxx> > Cc: gcc-help@xxxxxxxxxxx > Betreff: Re: gcc-help@xxxxxxxxxxx > > On Mon, 11 May 2020 at 11:58, Keil, Jochen via Gcc-help > <gcc-help@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > Dear all, > > > > In our team we are employing GCC for embedded products which require > statically linked binaries. Our own code is proprietary, hence we would like to > make use of the GPL-3.0+ Runtime Exception. We do not modify the GCC nor > use Plugins to modify intermediate code, therefore I think we are allowed to > link our object code statically with libgcc without releasing our proprietary > source code. > > > > However, upon closer inspection of the GCC sources I found that the files > in the `libcc1` and `libcpp` folders do only carry the licensing terms of GPL- > 3.0+ without any mention of the Runtime Exception. Is it still valid to use > those libraries with statically linked proprietary code? > > As Florian said, you should ask your lawyers for legal advice. Are you > even linking to libcc1 and libcpp though? If you're not linking to > them, their license doesn't affect your code. I just read Richard Sandiford's mail which helps to further clarify the question. Thank you to all who replied and helped me in this regard! I would also like to apologize that I forgot to add a proper subject. That's usually not the case, but this one slipped. Thank you again and best wishes, Jochen
