On 2006-08-15 15:17, Justin C. Sherrill wrote:
On Tue, August 15, 2006 5:28 am, Victor Balada Diaz wrote:
It's not because there are some FreeBSD material there, but because
when I updated the X11 chapter i got material copyrighted in the
last two years.
Hmm. This leads me to think of something else. Looking at the legal notice:
http://leaf.dragonflybsd.org/~justin/handbook/LEGALNOTICE.html
"Redistributions of source code (SGML DocBook) must retain the above
copyright notice, this list of conditions and the following disclaimer as
the first lines of this file unmodified."
The original copyright mentioned FreeBSD, not DragonFly. From what I'm
reading, it looks like what we need to to reproduce the FreeBSD license
verbatim, as it's required, and _also_ have a new version to cover our
work.
The biggest problem with that page is that there is no copyright notice
above that statement.
Following the practice found in the code what should be done is to
retain the FreeBSD copyright notice and add a DragonFly notice above or
below (can't find any consistent behavior on which one). Look at
src/sys/i386/i386/identcpu.c and src/sys/i386/i386/machdep.c.
--
Erik Wikström
