> gdb already ships with gnu-regex.c. Why not just move that to > libiberty? Because gdb, tcl, expect, cygwin, and gcc each have a copy of regex, and they're all different. Which to choose? > I can't see any reason for a BSD-licensed regex in libiberty. > libiberty already GPL code. Any regex added to libiberty becomes part of newlib and cygwin as well, and those projects are sensitive to GPL vs non-GPL licensing issues. -- Want to unsubscribe from this list? Check out: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple
- Another RFC: regex in libiberty DJ Delorie
- Re: Another RFC: regex in libiberty Ian Lance Taylor
- Re: Another RFC: regex in libiberty DJ Delorie
- Re: Another RFC: regex in libiberty Ian Lance Taylor
- Re: Another RFC: regex in libiberty Eli Zaretskii
- Re: Another RFC: regex in libiberty Mark Mitchell
- Re: Another RFC: regex in libiberty Zack Weinberg
- Re: Another RFC: regex in libiberty H . J . Lu
- Re: Another RFC: regex in libiberty Eli Zaretskii
- Re: Another RFC: regex in libiberty H . J . Lu
- Re: Another RFC: regex in libiberty Eli Zaretskii
- Re: Another RFC: regex in libiberty Jim Blandy
- Re: Another RFC: regex in libiberty Jim Blandy