On Wed, Apr 02, 2014 at 03:18:31PM -0700, Gregory Fong wrote: > On Mon, Feb 17, 2014 at 11:53 PM, Bernhard Reutner-Fischer > <[email protected]> wrote: > > On 18 February 2014 00:20:11 Gregory Fong <[email protected]> wrote: > > > >> Hello, > >> > >> Just wanted to ping about the patch "test/math: Add missing > >> libm-test-ulps-* > >> files" linked below from April 2012, was > >> there some issue that prevented it from being merged? > > > > > > No. Can you please import them from current glibc (2.19 ish) and ideally fix > > the failing cases, please? > > > > Looking into this now. It looks like most of libm was originally from > FreeBSD, which got their code from Sun. Just wondering, are there any > licensing concerns to take into consideration when porting fixes from > FreeBSD? I would assume that the default FreeBSD license applies to > any of the changes made by the FreeBSD project and so the right way to > handle this issue would be to add their copyright header to the file > when bringing in their fixes. At the very least I imagine the commit > messages should mention the original patch authors and source. Please > let me know if this sounds good.
There are no licensing concerns around the ulps, no. If you import files with a BSD-license then you have to retain the copyright notes, of course; See e.g. libm/README Any non-4-clause BSD license is compatible with LGPL and as such ok. thanks, _______________________________________________ uClibc mailing list [email protected] http://lists.busybox.net/mailman/listinfo/uclibc
