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 i thought it is an outdated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Anything that says differently is out-of-date, but the change was recent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
