This is the mail archive of the
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: RFC: OpenBSD configurations for gcc 3.3.x
- From: law at redhat dot com
- To: Joe Buck <Joe dot Buck at synopsys dot COM>
- Cc: Robert Dewar <dewar at gnat dot com>, Russ Allbery <rra at stanford dot edu>, espie at nerim dot net, Nathanael Nerode <neroden at twcny dot rr dot com>, gcc at gcc dot gnu dot org
- Date: Fri, 16 Jan 2004 10:27:59 -0700
- Subject: Re: RFC: OpenBSD configurations for gcc 3.3.x
- Reply-to: law at redhat dot com
In message <20040116090750.A27838@synopsys.com>, Joe Buck writes:
>On Fri, Jan 16, 2004 at 05:15:13AM -0500, Robert Dewar wrote:
>> Of course it is indeed prudent to put a visible notice on all documents,
>> but the exact form and the use of (C) [which was the genesis of this
>> thread] are no longer legally significant. Note also that the discussion
>> of whether you have to say 1991-2005, or mention every year between is
>> also irrelevant, there is no particular reason to prefer explicit
>> mention of every year in between.
>While I'm sure that you are right, the FSF wants us to require that every
>year be listed, so at least for now that's the policy. Ask RMS if you
>want to get it changed.
Right. In fact, a few years ago I got lazy and started using the
x-y format. RMS requested that we go back and fix all of them to list
the years explicitly (and to whomever fixed them back then, thank you!)
Unless we hear otherwise from RMS, let's please use the format he has