On Tuesday, August 29, 2017 06:43:19 meppl via Digitalmars-d wrote: > i incidentally noticed the FAQ claims the dmd-backend would be > licensed under a norton license. i thought it is an outdated > information: > https://dlang.org/faq.html#q5 > > > however, i also checked the source code and it turned out that > some files dont contain the string "boost": > $ fgrep -iLR boost src/ddmd/backend/ > src/ddmd/backend/bcomplex.h > src/ddmd/backend/dt.h > src/ddmd/backend/backend.txt > src/ddmd/backend/code_stub.h > src/ddmd/backend/dwarf2.h > src/ddmd/backend/dwarf.d > src/ddmd/backend/mach.d > src/ddmd/backend/md5.c > src/ddmd/backend/md5.h > src/ddmd/backend/bcomplex.c > src/ddmd/backend/mscoff.d > src/ddmd/backend/dwarf2.d > src/ddmd/backend/xmm.h > src/ddmd/backend/cv4.d > src/ddmd/backend/mscoff.h > src/ddmd/backend/mach.h > src/ddmd/backend/dwarf.h > src/ddmd/backend/melf.h > src/ddmd/backend/md5.d > src/ddmd/backend/bcomplex.d > src/ddmd/backend/cv4.h > > > do you think the missing license headers are relevant? If not, i > would make a pull request for the FAQ
Both the frontend and backend are now entirely under the Boost license. Anything that says differently is out-of-date, but the change was recent enough, and there have been enough places to change, that it's no surprise if you've found some places where it hasn't been updated yet. - Jonathan M Davis