From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Jeffrey A Law <law@cygnus.com>
To: Marc Espie <Marc.Espie@liafa.jussieu.fr>
Cc: egcs@egcs.cygnus.com
Subject: Re: libiberty legal status ? 
Date: Thu, 30 Sep 1999 18:02:00 -0000
Message-ID: <28760.936784674@upchuck.cygnus.com>
References: <19990908112813.A28184@liafa1.liafa.jussieu.fr>
X-SW-Source: 1999-09n/msg00279.html
Message-ID: <19990930180200.yoAqjS162dK_V5BiPcodBT_0MjVGlUU6j1_AEkTUWA0@z>

  In message < 19990908112813.A28184@liafa1.liafa.jussieu.fr >you write:
  > While browsing thru libiberty code, I noticed a rather disturbing problem.
  > Some of the files there have been bodily lifted from other GNU tools,
  > verbatim.
  > 
  > This means that they retain a full GPL copyright notice, whereas 
  > libiberty license is supposed to be LGPL.
  > 
  > So, suddenly, the legal status of libiberty is completely unclear.
  > 
  > I presume the logical course would be to change the copyright notice
  > of these files, which only the FSF can do, if I read things right...
libio/libstdc++ do not suck in any of the files that are GPL'd.  Only those
which are LGPL or public domain.

See Jason's patch from a while back.

The legal status of libiberty is clear.  Read the copyrights -)

jeff