[fpc-pascal] Re: Pathscale: alternative debugger on Linux?

Reinier Olislagers reinierolislagers at gmail.com
Mon Nov 12 14:20:06 CET 2012

On 12-11-2012 13:51, Lukasz Sokol wrote:
> On 11/11/2012 08:48, Reinier Olislagers wrote:
>> On 11-11-2012 6:55, microcode-ytc+IHgoah0 at public.gmane.org wrote:
>>> On Sat, Nov 10, 2012 at 07:57:09PM +0100, Jonas Maebe wrote: > > On 10
>>> Nov 2012, at 19:38, microcode-ytc+IHgoah0 at public.gmane.org wrote: > > > On Sat, Nov 10, 2012
>>> at 06:20:29PM +0100, Reinier Olislagers wrote: > >> Has anybody tried
>>> the Pathscale debugger on Linux x64/FreeBSD? > >> > >> I haven't myself,
>>> just heard that they open sourced their compiler suite. > >> > >> A
>>> download page seems to be here: > >>
>> [2]
>> http://www.pathscale.com/pdf/PathScale_Software_License.pdf
> See in that file, article 3.1 and 3.2. In short, Pathscale's portions cannot
> be used however you want.

Yep, 3.1 says the license is assigned to you as a person and that you
can use it for internal business purposes.
How this translates to a compiler is a bit weird. IMO, if you're a
software house, writing code and compiling it would be your internal
business purpose, so that would be fine.

That 3.1 is perhaps a sort of protection against people reselilng the
Pathscale stuff as their own product or something?!? However, any
GPL-licensed software would trump that part of the agreeement anyway...

3.3 is covered in your other mail.

BTW, I noticed some threads on the Phoronix forum going on about GPL
code being injected into compiled code, which would "contaminate" the
entire binary with the GPL license, so no chance to create a MIT/BSD etc
licensed binary.

Haven't looked into it further because I only wanted to point out the
debugger could perhaps be a useful alternative to gdb...


More information about the fpc-pascal mailing list