Re: gcc SRPM

Justin Walker wrote:
> 
> On Feb 24, 2005, at 16:45, John Summerfield wrote:
> 
>>
>>
>> Finlay Dobbie wrote:
>>
>>> On Wed, 23 Feb 2005 22:37:40 -0500, Brian Sammon
>>> <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Is there an SRPM for gcc?
>>>> I don't see one in http://www.opendarwin.org/downloads/7.2.1/SRPMS/
>>>
>>> Just out of interest, why do you want a SRPM?
>>
>>
>>
>> Because the licence under which Apple uses it requires that it be 
>> provided to all its customers who want it?
> 
> 
> You may be confused; I think the subject is availability of the source 
> in a particular format (SRPM); I doubt the GNU licences require a 
> particular format.  In addition, the source is always available from 
> Apple, as is required (the Open Darwin project is not Apple).
> 

Perhaps a little confused as to who's responsible, but the point still 
stands. If the binaries are shipped as an RPM, then the package i a 
derived work and so still covered by the GPL, and the srource RPM is the 
most sensible packaging to enable a user to recreate the binaries. In 
some cases a tarball containing the spec file will work as will an 
expanded source rpm, but I don't think either is more convenient to most 
users or developers than the source rpm.

And if, as I believe, Open Darwin is derived from Apple sources then 
it's in Apple's interests to aid users in ensuring the relevant Apple 
licences are honoured.

If OD got the gcc sources from the FSF, then of course Apple isn't involved.