> E: Downvoters, have you read the article? The program started a new process for each address lookup instead > of using a library because that library is GPL

> E: Downvoters, have you read the article? The program started a new process for each address lookup instead > of using a library because that library is GPL. > > Shall we have a discussion? Yeah no, they simply had a bad alternative implementation which could have been just as fast as the licence incompatible library call: > non-bfd, without patch: 7m59s > non-bfd, with patch: 15s > bfd: 15s -- https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=911815#38 https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=911815#38 The same could have happened due to other reasons for alternative implementation, that range from availability of more than one implementation with different advantages and disadvantages, different OS the code needs to run on, or simply preference. Blaming the license in this case is just short-sighted and with the wording used it just shows a bias of yours against the GPL, but not actual will to participate in a meaningful discussion on the linked thematic.