Mark Mitchell announced the availability of GCC 4.2.2 saying, "GCC 4.2.2 is a bug-fix release, containing fixes for regressions in GCC 4.2.1 relative to previous GCC releases." He adds, "the compilers in this release are covered by GNU General Public License version 3," making GCC 4.2.2 the first released under the GPLv3.
GCC is the GNU Compiler Collection which includes C, C++, Objective-C, Fortran, Java, and Ada compilers. Download GCC 4.2.2 from your nearest gcc.gnu.org mirror.
From: Mark Mitchell [email blocked] Reply-to: [email blocked] Subject: GCC 4.2.2 Released Date: Tue, 9 Oct 2007 13:22:19 -0700 GCC 4.2.2 has been released. GCC 4.2.2 is a bug-fix release, containing fixes for regressions in GCC 4.2.1 relative to previous GCC releases. This release is available from the FTP servers listed at: http://www.gnu.org/order/ftp.html The compilers in this release are covered by GNU General Public License version 3. See: http://gplv3.fsf.org for more information about GPLv3. Please do not contact me directly regarding questions or comments about this release or about GPLv3. Instead, use the resources available from http://gcc.gnu.org. As always, a vast number of people contributed to this GCC release -- far too many to thank individually! -- Mark Mitchell CodeSourcery mark@codesourcery.com (650) 331-3385 x713
minor version-level, does it exist ?
Linus branch of Linux do it all the time..
Now gcc did it by changing something as fundamental as licensing.
The idea (code and license) of gcc 4.2 was recognized by the numbers 4.2.
The "bugfix level" was recognized by looking at the appending number 4.2.z
Am i wrong in thinking in those lanes ?
For those who doesn't use versioning or just randomly assigns number on their projects:
As examples, in linux or gcc projects that are using x.y.z versioning.
The Z is supposed to be minor version-level that doesn't change anything but
bugfixes and documentation or maybe some minor tweaks that can be fully tested.
Why isn't that sacred to any projects ?
The minor version-level is also the ONLY common versioning convention that is acknowledged and followed (atleast if reading the README) by most projects. Most other versioning features/ideas is more project specific..
The release manager inside me is chocked.
Can't find a reference to GPL 3 for gcc 4.2.2...
I know this announcement says gcc 4.2.2 is now GPL 3 licensed, but why doesn't anywhere on http://gcc.gnu.org/ say this? I also unpacked the gcc-core tar.gz file for gcc 4.2.2 and this still has the GPL 2 COPYING (and a LGPL 2 COPYING.LIB) file!
If you dig into the gcc 4.2.2 online Manual, you see that its GPL license is here:
http://gcc.gnu.org/onlinedocs/gcc-4.2.2/gcc/Copying.html
Yep, it's GPL 2 again! Does anyone from the GCC team want to clear up the confusion (e.g. fix the licensing on the Web and maybe re-release the source package with the correct license in)?