From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 27383 invoked by alias); 22 Apr 2003 19:35:25 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gcc-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: Sender: gcc-owner@gcc.gnu.org Received: (qmail 27363 invoked from network); 22 Apr 2003 19:35:24 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO piper.synopsys.com) (204.176.21.194) by sources.redhat.com with SMTP; 22 Apr 2003 19:35:24 -0000 Received: (from jbuck@localhost) by piper.synopsys.com (8.11.6/8.11.6) id h3MJYca32047; Tue, 22 Apr 2003 12:34:38 -0700 Date: Tue, 22 Apr 2003 20:43:00 -0000 From: Joe Buck To: "Kaveh R. Ghazi" Cc: pcarlini@unitus.it, dj@redhat.com, gcc@gcc.gnu.org, libstdc++@gcc.gnu.org Subject: Re: Libiberty's snprintf for v3? Message-ID: <20030422123438.A32019@synopsys.com> References: <3EA44576.90708@unitus.it> <200304220041.UAA22116@caip.rutgers.edu> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline User-Agent: Mutt/1.2.5.1i In-Reply-To: <200304220041.UAA22116@caip.rutgers.edu>; from ghazi@caip.rutgers.edu on Mon, Apr 21, 2003 at 08:41:27PM -0400 X-SW-Source: 2003-04/txt/msg01090.txt.bz2 On Mon, Apr 21, 2003 at 08:41:27PM -0400, Kaveh R. Ghazi wrote: > I see two remedies. > > 1. Someone (not me, probably Paolo :-) ) needs to write to > assign@gnu.org, explain the situation and ask them to change the > license on vasprintf.c to GPL + special exception. This isn't so > bad, I've found them to be reasonable and responsive. Then you > can suck in that file too. Better to ask RMS directly, cc-ing the SC list; RMS has been cooperative lately on requests for license changes of this type, and he is the decision maker. As an SC member, you have more leverage than Paolo, also it could be argued that by agreeing to be on the SC we've agreed to fight such battles. In any case, if Paolo asks assign@gnu.org, they'll ask RMS, and then RMS will ask the SC list what it's about, so you're just adding a few weeks to the process. > 2. Someone (probably me) needs to rewrite [v]snprintf.c to avoid > using vasprintf. If we have perfectly good code, it seems that it's better to use the relicensing approach, unless RMS rejects it.