"Joseph S. Myers" <jos...@codesourcery.com> writes: > On Sun, 6 Jan 2013, Richard Sandiford wrote: > >> Anyway, here's my attempt a script to convert to ranges and, if enabled, >> to include the current year. The script only updates FSF copyright notices >> and leaves others alone. I've tried my best to make sure that licences >> and imported FSF sources aren't touched, but I could have missed some cases. > > I don't see anything to exclude the soft-fp files imported from glibc > (where the current glibc versions should be copied instead ... but note > that some soft-fp files, e.g. for TImode, are GCC-specific and not in > glibc).
Hmm, OK. Is there a plan to move those to glibc? Every file seems to say "This file is part of the GNU C Library.", but it wasn't obvious whether that was an aspiration or just cut-&-paste. Maybe it'd be easier for the script to treat them all as imported and soft-fp altogether. Would that be OK? > It may make sense to leave out libiberty (and other directories shared > with the src repository) initially. To convert them, binutils will need > an appropriate README notice explaining the meaning of ranges (like the > one I added to GCC's toplevel README a while back), as per GNU policy, and > someone may need to work out whether any missing years being inserted in > the ranges need to be copyrightable years for all of GCC, binutils and GDB > (and what the copyrightable year ranges are in each case - the years in > which either there was a release of the relevant package, including beta > releases etc., or it had public version control). OK, hadn't expected it to be that complicated, but there again, I wasn't sure if we'd ever use the --shared flag anyway. It was there as much to differentiate the "shared with src" cases from the "imported from upstream" cases. > I think a patch for each directory will need posting separately for review > of such things as whether any imported / generated files are mistakenly > changed. So fixincludes/ separate from gcc/, and every library separate? OK. >> I've also attached a bzip2 patch of the gcc/ and fixincludes/ part. >> This patch converts to ranges but doesn't add 2013. I can add 2013 >> at the same time, separately or not at all; let me know. > > I think 2013 should be added (so the notices should say <year>-2013, for > any value of <year> 1986 or later, all years 1987 and later being > copyrightable years for GCC). But --version notices should just say 2013 > (including e.g. that in fixincludes/mkheaders.in). OK, thanks. Richard
