[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: a list of software compiled by completely free toolchain
From: |
Gabriel Striewe |
Subject: |
Re: a list of software compiled by completely free toolchain |
Date: |
Fri, 13 Nov 2009 01:17:30 +0100 (CET) |
Alan Mackenzie <acm@muc.de> hat am 12. November 2009 um 22:47 geschrieben:
> 'Evening, Gabriel!
>
> Gabriel Striewe <linux@gabriel-striewe.de> wrote:
> > [-- text/plain, encoding quoted-printable, charset: UTF-8, 38 lines --]
>
> > Hello all,
>
> > Python (if I am not right, I am sure there exist other examples of this
> > case) as of now seems to still depend on Visual C being compiled on
> > Windows and still causing problems being compiled with MinGW.
>
> Is that really true? Aren't there any free C compilers native to
> Windows? Hasn't GCC been targeted at Windows native?
Yes, GCC has been targeted at Windows natively, in the MinGW project. The
Microsoft Visual C compiler is free of charge, but that is not in the sense
of freedom endorsed by the gnu foundation.
As for Python, there do exist a few patches to make it compile under Windows
using MinGW, but this compilation process is not officially endorsed by
the python guys. On www.python.org, you can get a python installer, but
not the source to compile on Windows/MinGW.
>
> > Now, assuming that providing open source software on Windows doesn't
> > give Windows an unfair advantage having all this good software
> > available on it, but rather to the contrary, makes it easier?for
> > Windows users making the transition to Linux, ....
>
> Which I believe would actually be the case. As well as making it easier
> for free software programmers to hack Windows, thus making it more of a
> free-for-all.
>
> > ...., since all the software they started using on Windows (open source
> > software, of course) is available on Linux, too, doesn't this mean
> > Python is not as free as it could be?
>
> Perhaps, in theory. If this particular lack of freedom were ever to bite
> some day, I suspect it would be fixed in days rather than weeks.
Could be that maybe I am too pessimistic about it.
>
> > What if one day Visual C in its license forbids using it to compile
> > open source software? Is that completely impossible?
>
> I suspect it wouldn't happen in practice, even if it's possible in
> theory. It would signify Microsoft waving the white flag of surrender.
> Also, who'd buy a compiling system for several hundred euros, were it to
> restrict the licensing of their own programs?
>
> > On the Gnu website there is a list of completely free linux
> > distributions. Would this website be also a place for a list of
> > software which
>
> > a) exists on Linux as well as Windows, making the transition to a good
> > operating system possible
>
> That'd be a delicate suggestion, since it would, to some extent, be
> advocating the use of proprietary software, or at least look a bit like
> it.
I did not put it in clear enough words: of course this list would only
include free software.
>
> > b) can (on Windows) be compiled using a completely free toolchain (that
> > is, MinGW)
>
> Can't all free software written in C be built with MinGW?
>
That's what I wish would one day be true.
> > Any hints whether such a site / interest group already exists are
> > greatly appreciated.
>
> I don't know of any.
During the next days I am going to try to compile K3D under Windows
using MinGW. If it's successful, I will set up a note on my
website.
>
> > Thanks
>
> > Gabriel Striewe
>
> --
> Alan Mackenzie (Nuremberg, Germany).
>
> _______________________________________________
> gnu-misc-discuss mailing list
> gnu-misc-discuss@gnu.org
> http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnu-misc-discuss
- Re: a list of software compiled by completely free toolchain, (continued)
Re: a list of software compiled by completely free toolchain, Alan Mackenzie, 2009/11/12
Re: a list of software compiled by completely free toolchain,
Gabriel Striewe <=
Re: a list of software compiled by completely free toolchain, Tim Smith, 2009/11/13