On Wed, Jan 15, 2003 at 03:21:47PM -0500, Charles Wilson wrote: >Christopher Faylor wrote: > >> >>I don't want to add any more libiberty routines to cygwin since the >>licensing is suspect. So, please follow the normal submission rules. >>Probably miscfuncs.cc is the place to add this. >> > >That make sense. Unlike many of the other functions in libiberty, The >basename() function itself in libiberty/basename.c is public domain -- >which may be good for our purposes, or it may be bad (I dunno, and cgf >has already made the call: it's "suspect". Fair enough.) In any case, >it does no harm to have "our" own version that can be copyright-assigned >to Red Hat and distributed under the Cygwin license.
I once thought that the libiberty functions were ok to use but someone told me that their copyright status was suspect. Perhaps more pragmatically, I don't like the current method of depending on libiberty objects in the makefile. So, I think it's simpler to avoid using them. However, pulling in versions from, say, FreeBSD would be acceptable. cgf
