Bug#95101: (no subject)

[Taketoshi Sano <sano@debian.org>]

Hi, Brian.  Thank you for your review and verification.

> On Tue, Apr 24, 2001 at 02:46:10PM +0900, Taketoshi Sano wrote:
> > Package: libc6
> > Version: 2.2.2-4
> > Severity: normal
> >
> > I have checked the source codes in glibc-2.2.2.tar.bz2,=20
> > and found that sysdeps/posix/getaddrinfo.c and inet/getnameinfo.c
> >   ("The Inner Net License, Version 2.00", clause 4)
> >   | 4. All advertising materials mentioning features or use of 
> >   |    this software must display the following acknowledgement 
> >   |    with the name(s) of the authors as specified in 
> >   |    the copyright notice(s) substituted where indicated:
> >   |         This product includes software developed by <name(s)>, 
> >   |         The InnerNet, and other contributors.
> 
> I checked the latest version, and this clause has been extirpated.

I haven't checked this bug on recent versions.
I'll get the source and look through it.

> >   sysdeps/mach/hurd/net/if_ppp.h
> >   sysdeps/mach/sys/reboot.h
> >   sysdeps/unix/sysv/linux/net/if_ppp.h
> >   sysdeps/vax/htonl.s
> >   sysdeps/vax/htons.s
> >   libio/filedoalloc.c
> >   libio/wfiledoalloc.c
> >   stdlib/random.c
> >   stdlib/random_r.c
> 
> None of these files have objectionable clauses in them. This is probably
> because the University of California has granted permission to remove
> the third clause and the glibc developers just never got around to it.

I'm glad to hear that.  Thanks for your checking.

> > And libdb2 has also the licenses which has advertising clause
> > one written by Harvard University and another by the University
> > of California. The license by Sleepycat Software seems to have
> > conflict with the GPL, but this can be avoided by the notice in
> > README file written by them.
> 
> I couldn't find any libdb2 files in the latest glibc source (2.3.1-13).
> Are you sure they're still there?

I haven't check the code of the current version (2.3).

> I'm closing this bug; if you have any objections, merely reopen it.

I trust your checking, but anyway I'll get the code and look it,
since this bug was annoying one to me.  I'm very happy to see
the elimination of those conflict terms of the licenses.

Thanks :)
-- 
  Taketoshi Sano: <sano@debian.org>,<sano@debian.or.jp>,<kgh12351@nifty.ne.jp>