http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=44035
--- Comment #3 from joseph at codesourcery dot com <joseph at codesourcery dot com> 2011-03-09 20:27:27 UTC --- On Wed, 9 Mar 2011, amylaar at gcc dot gnu.org wrote: > 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 But did you send it to RMS? RMS finds it easier to deal with licensing of specific bodies of text than with general permissions, but that requires a concrete patch being placed before him showing quite what FSF-owned text you want to license how - and as with all patches, this is best done without intermediaries, direct from the person preparing the patch to RMS.
