Re: dropping sigc++

On Mon, 17 Jan 2005 21:20:57 +0000, Phil <[email protected]> wrote:
> Please don't top post!
> 
> James Harr wrote:
> > How do the need for c++, sigc++, and autoconf relate at all?
> 
> You need a C++ compiler to build libsigc++ and those parts of Y which
> use it.  Autoconf shouldn't need C++, but Y's configure script will
> check for a C++ compiler.
> 

Exactly.

> > And how would removing autoconf, and sigc++ be doing something useful with
> > this project?
> 
> Judging from his previous posts, when he says "useful" I think he means
> it's useful for some other project he's working on, and not necessarily
> for anyone else.
> 
> Unless/until I'm corrected on this I propose we ignore him.
> 
> While we're on the subject, and I don't mean to imply that I think this
> is going on, I have a word of warning to anyone who wants to incorporate
> Y code into another project:
> 
> Y is GPL code.  It would infringe the contributor's copyright if you
> were to include it in a non-GPLed product*.  Please do not do this.  I
> take the same view of copyright infringement as the netfilter/iptables
> team, and I personally know quite a lot of attorneys in various countries.
> 
[snipped...]

Im using Y with gnustep. Thats GPL. GNUstep is objc and gcc cant link
objc with c++ yet like what the apple gcc is doing.

-- 
Blood is thicker than water... and much tastier
                                           John Davidorff Pell