[PATCH] GPL licence corrections

I've found a few inconsistencies with the wording of some license statements refering to "GNU public license" and similar, and have reworded them properly to "GNU General Public License". Please apply this to 2.4.0, it's against test9. I'll do one for 2.2.x too, and look for other such typo/thin

Re: [PATCH] GPL licence corrections

[EMAIL PROTECTED] said: > I've found a few inconsistencies with the wording of some license > statements refering to "GNU public license" and similar, and have > reworded them properly to "GNU General Public License". If we're referring to it by name, we probably ought to call it the 'GNU Gener

Re: [PATCH] GPL licence corrections

> If we're referring to it by name, we probably ought to call it the > 'GNU General Public License' (sic). You've used the British spelling > of Licence. That spelling was obviously used when grepping too, and as a result 343 occurences of "GNU Public License" (ignoring case) was missed. -- And

Re: [PATCH] GPL licence corrections

lds <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, > Linux Kernel mailing list <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 >Subject: Re: [PATCH] GPL licence corrections > >> If we're referring to it by name, we probably ought to call it the >> 'G

Re: [PATCH] GPL licence corrections

]>, > Alan Cox <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii >Subject: Re: [PATCH] GPL licence corrections > > >[EMAIL PROTECTED] said: >> I've found a few inconsistencies with the wording of some license >> statements refering to &quo

Re: [PATCH] GPL licence corrections

On Mon, 16 Oct 2000, Mike A. Harris wrote: > Actually I just looked through my command history and found the > exact command I used: > > grep -ir "licence" * > ../license-grep-2.4 > > Talk about not being able to decide how to spell something! > Heheh. I normally spell it "license", however