Re: [HACKERS] BSD advertizing clause in some files

On 3/27/07, Bruce Momjian [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I removed the advertising clause from all the BSD-copyrighted files from Berkeley, namely all but */blf.*. Their upstream is OpenBSD that still has same license. NetBSD and FreeBSD have even worse versions with ssleay license. I think I need

Re: [HACKERS] BSD advertizing clause in some files

Neil Conway wrote: Bruce Momjian wrote: Someone has pointed out that the following files have the 4-part BSD copyright, which includes the advertising clause: src/backend/port/darwin/system.c src/backend/port/dynloader/freebsd.c src/backend/port/dynloader/openbsd.c

Re: [HACKERS] BSD advertizing clause in some files

Neil Conway [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Rather than removing the copyright clause per se, it might be better to just update to the latest versions of these files in an upstream source (e.g. NetBSD). They've already gone through their source tree and updated the Berkeley copyrights as

[HACKERS] BSD advertizing clause in some files

Someone has pointed out that the following files have the 4-part BSD copyright, which includes the advertising clause: src/backend/port/darwin/system.c src/backend/port/dynloader/freebsd.c src/backend/port/dynloader/openbsd.c src/backend/port/dynloader/netbsd.c

Re: [HACKERS] BSD advertizing clause in some files

Bruce Momjian wrote: Someone has pointed out that the following files have the 4-part BSD copyright, which includes the advertising clause: src/backend/port/darwin/system.c src/backend/port/dynloader/freebsd.c src/backend/port/dynloader/openbsd.c

Re: [HACKERS] BSD advertizing clause in some files

Bruce Momjian wrote: Someone has pointed out that the following files have the 4-part BSD copyright, which includes the advertising clause: src/backend/port/darwin/system.c src/backend/port/dynloader/freebsd.c src/backend/port/dynloader/openbsd.c