Am 16.07.25 um 12:12 schrieb Jonathan Wakely via Gcc-help:
On Wed, 16 Jul 2025 at 10:06, Qifan.Zhou via Gcc <gcc@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Dear GCC Team,
Please don't email both gcc@xxxxxxxxxxx and gcc-help@xxxxxxxxxxx, pick
the appropriate one. You're not discussing development of GCC so this
belongs on the gcc-help list.
Anyway ...
I hope this message finds you well. I'm writing to seek official clarification regarding the use of GCC compilers in our proprietary, closed-source commercial software development.
Our specific use case involves:
1.
Using GCC executables (gcc.exe<https://gcc.exe/>, g++.exe, etc.) to compile and link our C/C++ source code
2.
Dynamically linking to GCC runtime libraries (libstdc++, libgcc, etc.)
3.
Potential distribution of our compiled binaries to customers without source code
Based on our understanding of the GPL and LGPL licenses:
*
We believe that simply using GCC to compile our software doesn't require us to open-source our code
*
Dynamic linking to LGPL-licensed runtime libraries appears permissible for proprietary software
*
However, we want to ensure full compliance with all licensing requirements
Nobody on this list is going to give you legal advice. You should read
https://www.gnu.org/licenses/gcc-exception-3.1-faq.html
Most sources of the GCC target libraries carry the Runtime Library
Exception (RLE), though there are exceptions. One common case is that
headers from the compiler are used in libgcc, but the compiler headers
do not have the RLE.
An example is gcc/config/aarch64/aarch64.h
https://gcc.gnu.org/PR61152
I know this is likely no issue for the GCC developers or the FSF; but
for some users, it is.
There was a proposal to not include compiler files in target libs, and
to use build-in macros or similar devices instead. But that goal has
not been achieved to all of my knowledge.
Johann
Quoting from that document:
"However, the FSF decided long ago to allow developers to use GCC's
libraries to compile any program, regardless of its license."
"Therefore, these libraries have always had license exceptions that
allow people to distribute the object code GCC produces under any
license."
Read the full document for the full details and restrictions that
apply if you're using a modified GCC.
Could you please confirm:
1. Whether this usage pattern complies with GCC's licensing terms
2. If distributing our compiled binaries requires any additional steps to maintain compliance
3. Whether there are any special considerations when using GCC in a MinGW-like configuration
We greatly respect the work of the GCC community and want to ensure we're using the compiler in full compliance with its licensing terms. Your guidance would be invaluable in helping us navigate these requirements.
Thank you for your time and consideration. I look forward to your response.
Best regards,
