No, I'm telling you that you are fine, you don't need to go looking. glibc is safe for commercial use as long as you don't do anything really unusual. - Dan On Sun, Jun 28, 2020 at 1:09 PM Paul Smith <paul@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > On Sun, 2020-06-28 at 19:53 +0000, JacobK622 via Gcc-help wrote: > > What I hoped to accomplish with my first email was to avoid having to > > go through each file in the standard c library and standard c++ > > library and determine what license each was under. If I'm reading > > Dan Kegel's suggestion correctly, I would actually end up doing more > > work rather than less, because I'd have to count lines of code of > > each function/method in each file. > > You only have to do that work if you aren't ready to believe our > assertions that it's not needed, and the intentions of the authors of > the GNU libc library to ensure that it's not needed, but instead need > to prove this to yourself empirically. > > > Paul Smith pointed out that nothing said here is legally binding nor > > "legal advice" and is nothing more than as he put it, "Advice from > > someone on the internet". I am fully aware of this fact. I'm not > > looking for a lawyer just some help solving my problem. > > As mentioned above, we've provided our opinions, which is all we can do > and what you have asked for. > > If that's good enough then you're all set and no more work needs to be > done. Remember, there are already _thousands_ of proprietary C and C++ > programs running on GNU/Linux platforms, all of which were compiled > with GCC and linked against GNU libc, and they are not having any legal > troubles related to this. > > If you need more than that, then yes, you'll have to do more work to > achieve whatever level of satisfaction you require. How much work that > is, is up to you and we can't help with that. > > Cheers! > >
