http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=44035
--- Comment #2 from Jorn Wolfgang Rennecke <amylaar at gcc dot gnu.org> 2011-03-09 20:12:15 UTC --- (In reply to comment #1) > Joern, after discussion with Mark and Richi my advice at this point on the > GFDL > issue is that you should prepare a concrete patch that moves all the text you > want from both code and documentation to its ideal places in target.def, I did this once before: http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2010-01/msg00559.html This was a lot of work, since I went through all the hook in code and doc/*.texi documentation to merge the contained information, and for a number of dubious documentation I also checked against the actual implementation for the veracity/accuracy of the documentation. It seems unlikely that I'll find time to re-do this work any time soon. If RMS want to see how the code / documentation works, he can have a look at this patch. With regards to the body of text that we want dual-licensed, in addition to the target.def from the old patch, we should also consider the current target.def, and all the documentation of specific target hooks in tm.texi . That's all the @hook definitions, and a probably a bunch of @deftypefn too . All or most of the remaining @deftypefn definitons, and the @defmac definitions, should probably converted to hooks, so we want that documentation also to be dual-licensed. If RMS has specific objections about dual-licensing particular @hook / @deftypefn / @defmac texts, he could list these, so we can continue handling them in our current haphazard way of having two sets of incomplete documentation fragments that are disjointly maintained with incompatible licenses.
