Hello, I have a patch (accompanying those other ones on gcc-paches) to fix
--- a/gcc/java/lang.opt +++ b/gcc/java/lang.opt @@ -209,212 +209,213 @@ Java ; ; Warnings handled by ecj. -; FIXME: document them ; but I did start off with the help texts from <http://help.eclipse.org/stable/index.jsp?topic=/org.eclipse.jdt.doc.isv/guide/jdt_api_compile.htm> which AFAICS falls under the Eclipse Public License - v 1.0 <http://www.eclipse.org/legal/epl-v10.html>. Now my question, before I blindly post this to {gcc,java}-patches and thus create potential legal hassles for whoever works on it: was it OKed (by the SC or FSF) to integrate such material into GCC? If not, would you think that it suffices if I reformulate the entries sufficiently, or do we need to start playing the legal game, if the situation is to be improved? Thanks! Ralf
