From: James S. <jam...@op...> - 2007-04-24 06:28:36
|
Hi All, I have written a bit of code that parses a file and uses regular expressions to find strings in lines of the file. Is there such a thing as regular expressions in Microsoft land? I haven't seen anything yet. I'm not sure that what I have done is quite kosher - given that we don't want to publish our code. I grabbed a copy of the source package for regex on the fsf web site, wrote a def file for the few POSIX functions I needed, and compiled regex.c (with regex.h) into a dll. Therefore I have not modified the code and have not copied the code into my source, just referenced the header file and linked to the resulting dll. Is that very naughty of me? Cheers, James. |
From: Jonathan W. <jf...@tp...> - 2007-04-24 06:58:55
|
> I'm not sure that what I have done is quite kosher - given that we don't > want to publish our code. You are only required to give the source code to the people who receive the binaries. |
From: James S. <jam...@op...> - 2007-04-24 07:02:17
|
On Tue, 2007-04-24 at 14:58 +0800, Jonathan Wilson wrote: > > I'm not sure that what I have done is quite kosher - given that we don't > > want to publish our code. > You are only required to give the source code to the people who receive the > binaries. They're welcome to the regex source, but does what I've done mean that we would have to also have to give them a copy of the source I've written? Regards, James. |
From: Jonathan W. <jf...@tp...> - 2007-04-24 07:08:26
|
James Steward wrote: > On Tue, 2007-04-24 at 14:58 +0800, Jonathan Wilson wrote: >>> I'm not sure that what I have done is quite kosher - given that we don't >>> want to publish our code. >> You are only required to give the source code to the people who receive the >> binaries. > > They're welcome to the regex source, but does what I've done mean that > we would have to also have to give them a copy of the source I've > written? If the source code to regex is licensed under the GNU General Public License then yes you DO. |
From: Chris W. <ch...@qw...> - 2007-04-24 07:30:56
|
Hi James, On Tue, 24 Apr 2007, James Steward wrote: > On Tue, 2007-04-24 at 14:58 +0800, Jonathan Wilson wrote: >>> I'm not sure that what I have done is quite kosher - given that we don't >>> want to publish our code. >> You are only required to give the source code to the people who receive the >> binaries. > > They're welcome to the regex source, but does what I've done mean that > we would have to also have to give them a copy of the source I've > written? Depends on the exact license. You might want to check out PCRE (Perl Compatible Regular Expressions). It's BSD licensed and "The PCRE library is free, even for building commercial software." (www.pcre.org). It should be a drop-in replacement for most POSIX-compatible regexp libraries. Alternatively, I *think* that if you use a GPL regexp library, and if you distribute your binary *without* the regexp library binary (so that it does not run by itself) and require users to download the regexp library themselves, then you would not be infringing the library's license. But I'm not a lawyer. Cheers, Chris. -- _____ __ _ \ __/ / ,__(_)_ | Chris Wilson <0000 at qwirx.com> - Cambs UK | / (_/ ,\/ _/ /_ \ | Security/C/C++/Java/Perl/SQL/HTML Developer | \ _/_/_/_//_/___/ | We are GNU-free your mind-and your software | |
From: Chris W. <ch...@qw...> - 2007-04-24 07:27:03
|
Hi all, On Tue, 24 Apr 2007, Jonathan Wilson wrote: >> I'm not sure that what I have done is quite kosher - given that we don't >> want to publish our code. > > You are only required to give the source code to the people who receive the > binaries. If I understand correctly, under the GPL you may not restrict the recipient from further distributing your source code, as long as it remains under the GPL. Therefore I guess you might as well publish your source code if you do this ;-) Cheers, Chris. -- _____ __ _ \ __/ / ,__(_)_ | Chris Wilson <0000 at qwirx.com> - Cambs UK | / (_/ ,\/ _/ /_ \ | Security/C/C++/Java/Perl/SQL/HTML Developer | \ _/_/_/_//_/___/ | We are GNU-free your mind-and your software | |
From: James S. <jam...@op...> - 2007-04-24 21:16:19
|
Thank you all for your input. I am certainly no lawyer, and respect those who can enterpret the legal notices. On Tue, 2007-04-24 at 11:32 +0200, Felix Kater wrote: > On Tue, 24 Apr 2007 17:02:08 +1000 > James Steward <jam...@op...> wrote: > > > They're welcome to the regex source, but does what I've done mean that > > we would have to also have to give them a copy of the source I've > > written? > > AFAIK from several documents concerning the GPL interpretation it > depends on how your code is using the GPL code. To sum up a bit: If > your code has a freely configurable user interface (like a front-end) > so the client can download and select *different* regex libraries (like > entering a command and command line options) then your software is > probably considerable seperate from the GPL code. In all other cases > (like compiling/linking against a GPL library, dynamically loading it at > runtime, using GPL'ed pseudo wrappers between your code and the GPL > code etc.) you will break the license. Hmm. The regex I downloaded from FSF is GPL - not LGPL. http://directory.fsf.org/regex.html I'm surprised that I couldn't even dynamically load a library with LoadLibrary("regex.dll"), as the regex.dll could be the one I'm currently using, or one I wrote from scratch! Who's to know? All I need is a library that provided POSIX style regcomp, regexec, regfree and regerror. > If you find an LGPL'ed piece of code than things change a bit: You are > allowed to link against LGPL'ed libraries without being forced to open > your sources. I shall look, and I think Tor has found what might be the answer, and Danny too - Thanks. > Keep in mind: As long you simply want to prevent others from 'stealing' > your code, the GPL can protect your code as well. That's not the case here. Most companies simply don't want to have to ship (or make available) source with a hardware+software package. Thanks again to all for your advice. Regards, James. |
From: James S. <jam...@op...> - 2007-04-25 23:33:21
|
On Wed, 2007-04-25 at 17:59 +1000, James Steward wrote: > On Wed, 2007-04-25 at 00:54 +0300, Tor Lillqvist wrote: > > James Steward writes: > > > Hmm. The regex I downloaded from FSF is GPL - not LGPL. > > > http://directory.fsf.org/regex.html > > > > Hmm, but if you get the up-to-date versions of the same source files > > (regex.[ch], regex_internal.[ch], regcomp.c) from the GNU C library > > sources, they are LGPL. See > > http://sources.redhat.com/cgi-bin/cvsweb.cgi/libc/posix/regex_internal.c?rev=1.67&content-type=text/x-cvsweb-markup&cvsroot=glibc > > etc. > > That looks like just what the doctor ordered! Beauty! > > Thanks Tor. I grabbed the source for regex and built it. It appears to work just fine. I don't know if any others will find it useful, but I can send it if needs be. I had to make one small mod to regex_internal.h. It includes alloca.h, that wasn't found on my system. I added a #ifndef _MINGW_ ... #endif to prevent it from being included in my build. Should I have added a modification note of some sort to indicate that it wasn't original? If so what? And are similar copyright notices required on my Makefile, def file, etc? Regards, James. |
From: Keith M. <kei...@to...> - 2007-04-26 08:54:21
|
James Steward wrote: > I grabbed the source for regex and built it. It appears to work > just fine. I don't know if any others will find it useful, but I > can send it if needs be. It would be great, if you could provide a mingwPORT. If you need guidance on how to create that, please feel free to ask. > I had to make one small mod to regex_internal.h. Easily handled, by adding a patch file to the mingwPORT manifest. > It includes alloca.h, that wasn't found on my system. I added a > #ifndef _MINGW_ ... #endif to prevent it from being included in my > build. That should be __MINGW32__, if you want it exclusive to MinGW. For alloca.h, the preferred method would have been to use the autoconf standard macro, but for a cheap and cheerful MinGW specific solution, what you've done would be ok. > Should I have added a modification note of some sort to indicate > that it wasn't original? If so what? For each file you've modified, assuming it already contains a notice of accreditation for the original author(s), add a note below this saying something like: Modified 2007-04-?? by James Steward, to support __MINGW32__ Add something similar, in any top level README, NEWS or AUTHORS file, as you see fit. If there is a ChangeLog file, insert an appropriate entry, at the top. > And are similar copyright notices required on my Makefile, def file, > etc? That's your choice, but I'd recommend it. Use similar wording to that which you should find in other files in the package, in respect of it's GPL or LGPL licensing. Regards, Keith. |
From: James S. <jam...@op...> - 2007-04-26 23:01:44
|
On Thu, 2007-04-26 at 09:53 +0100, Keith MARSHALL wrote: > James Steward wrote: > > I grabbed the source for regex and built it. It appears to work > > just fine. I don't know if any others will find it useful, but I > > can send it if needs be. > > It would be great, if you could provide a mingwPORT. If you need > guidance on how to create that, please feel free to ask. Yes please. What I've done so far is downloaded just 6 files from the page below (I used the MAIN branch where there was a choice); http://sources.redhat.com/cgi-bin/cvsweb.cgi/libc/posix/?cvsroot=glibc#dirlist regcomp.c regexec.c regex.[ch] regex_internal.[ch] then cooked up a Makefile, a def file and a config.h (to define "bool", "true" and "false"), modified regex_internal.h source (as discussed below) and that's it. > > I had to make one small mod to regex_internal.h. > > Easily handled, by adding a patch file to the mingwPORT manifest. Sorry, you've lost me. What do I do here? > > It includes alloca.h, that wasn't found on my system. I added a > > #ifndef _MINGW_ ... #endif to prevent it from being included in my > > build. > > That should be __MINGW32__, if you want it exclusive to MinGW. That sounds better. I knew I'd seen those macros else where, but couldn't remember them precisely at the time of hacking. > For > alloca.h, the preferred method would have been to use the autoconf > standard macro, but for a cheap and cheerful MinGW specific solution, > what you've done would be ok. Good - I'll stick to cheap and cheerful at this stage ;-) > For each file you've modified, assuming it already contains a notice > of accreditation for the original author(s), add a note below this > saying something like: > > Modified 2007-04-?? by James Steward, to support __MINGW32__ > > Add something similar, in any top level README, NEWS or AUTHORS file, > as you see fit. If there is a ChangeLog file, insert an appropriate > entry, at the top. Will do. > > And are similar copyright notices required on my Makefile, def file, > > etc? > > That's your choice, but I'd recommend it. Use similar wording to that > which you should find in other files in the package, in respect of it's > GPL or LGPL licensing. Easy done. Regards, James. |
From: James S. <jam...@op...> - 2007-04-27 01:27:09
|
On Thu, 2007-04-26 at 09:53 +0100, Keith MARSHALL wrote: > James Steward wrote: > > And are similar copyright notices required on my Makefile, def file, > > etc? > > That's your choice, but I'd recommend it. Use similar wording to that > which you should find in other files in the package, in respect of it's > GPL or LGPL licensing. How does this look? /* Extended regular expression matching and search library. Copyright (C) 2007 In Chip Design P/L. This file is part of a cheap and cheerful port of the extended regular expression matching and search library (regex), taken from the GNU C Library, to MinGW. Contributed by James Steward <jamessteward _at_ optusnet.com.au>. The regex library is free software; you can redistribute it and/or modify it under the terms of the GNU Lesser General Public License as published by the Free Software Foundation; either version 2.1 of the License, or (at your option) any later version. The regex library is distributed in the hope that it will be useful, but WITHOUT ANY WARRANTY; without even the implied warranty of MERCHANTABILITY or FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE. See the GNU Lesser General Public License for more details. You should have received a copy of the GNU Lesser General Public License along with the GNU C Library; if not, write to the Free Software Foundation, Inc., 59 Temple Place, Suite 330, Boston, MA 02111-1307 USA. */ Cheers, James. P.S. As it probably shows, I've never had to deal with these sorts of issues. |
From: Keith M. <kei...@us...> - 2007-04-27 05:36:34
|
On Friday 27 April 2007 00:01, James Steward wrote: > > > I grabbed the source for regex and built it. =A0It appears to work > > > just fine. =A0I don't know if any others will find it useful, but I > > > can send it if needs be. > > > > It would be great, if you could provide a mingwPORT. =A0If you need > > guidance on how to create that, please feel free to ask. > > Yes please. > > What I've done so far is downloaded just 6 files from the page below > (I used the MAIN branch where there was a choice); > http://sources.redhat.com/cgi-bin/cvsweb.cgi/libc/posix/?cvsroot=3Dglib >c#dirlist Ah. So, it's just selective download of CVS components, rather than a=20 self contained tarball from an existing release site. The mingwPORT=20 format is more suited to the latter; in this case, the best approach=20 may be just be to create a tarball of all appropriate files, as a stand=20 alone release, mail it to me privately, so I can post it as a=20 contributed package, on the download site. Later yesterday, I did notice this: https://sourceforge.net/tracker/index.php?func=3Ddetail&aid=3D1477177&group= _id=3D2435&atid=3D752210 as yet unattended to, on the submission tracker. How would it compare? Regards, Keith. |
From: James S. <jam...@op...> - 2007-04-27 06:15:13
|
On Fri, 2007-04-27 at 06:36 +0100, Keith Marshall wrote: > On Friday 27 April 2007 00:01, James Steward wrote: > > > > I grabbed the source for regex and built it. It appears to work > > > > just fine. I don't know if any others will find it useful, but I > > > > can send it if needs be. > > > > > > It would be great, if you could provide a mingwPORT. If you need > > > guidance on how to create that, please feel free to ask. > > > > Yes please. > > > > What I've done so far is downloaded just 6 files from the page below > > (I used the MAIN branch where there was a choice); > > http://sources.redhat.com/cgi-bin/cvsweb.cgi/libc/posix/?cvsroot=glib > >c#dirlist > > Ah. So, it's just selective download of CVS components, rather than a > self contained tarball from an existing release site. The mingwPORT > format is more suited to the latter; in this case, the best approach > may be just be to create a tarball of all appropriate files, as a stand > alone release, mail it to me privately, so I can post it as a > contributed package, on the download site. Will do. > Later yesterday, I did notice this: > https://sourceforge.net/tracker/index.php?func=detail&aid=1477177&group_id=2435&atid=752210 > > as yet unattended to, on the submission tracker. How would it compare? It appears to be a package to download the GPL version from http://directory.fsf.org/regex.html, a patch and build for MinGW. It is the sources I started using, until I was advised of the implications of the GPL vs LGPL. The sources I've worked on are LGPL. Regards, James. |
From: Keith M. <kei...@us...> - 2007-04-27 05:50:14
|
On Friday 27 April 2007 02:27, James Steward wrote: > On Thu, 2007-04-26 at 09:53 +0100, Keith MARSHALL wrote: > > James Steward wrote: > > > And are similar copyright notices required on my Makefile, def > > > file, etc? > > > > That's your choice, but I'd recommend it. Use similar wording to > > that which you should find in other files in the package, in > > respect of it's GPL or LGPL licensing. > > How does this look? > > /* Extended regular expression matching and search library. > Copyright (C) 2007 In Chip Design P/L. > > This file is part of a cheap and cheerful port of the extended > regular expression matching and search library (regex), > taken from the GNU C Library, to MinGW. > > Contributed by James Steward <jamessteward _at_ optusnet.com.au>. > > The regex library is free software; you can redistribute it and/or > modify it under the terms of the GNU Lesser General Public > License as published by the Free Software Foundation; either > version 2.1 of the License, or (at your option) any later version. > > The regex library is distributed in the hope that it will be > useful, but WITHOUT ANY WARRANTY; without even the implied warranty > of MERCHANTABILITY or FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE. See the GNU > Lesser General Public License for more details. > > You should have received a copy of the GNU Lesser General Public > License along with the GNU C Library; if not, write to the Free > Software Foundation, Inc., 59 Temple Place, Suite 330, Boston, MA > 02111-1307 USA. */ Looks good to me. Just a couple of comments:-- 1) Is In Chip Design P/L your own Company? If so, then your copyright extends only to the files you've added as new; the original copyright holder still retains an interest in the package, and since your files alone aren't sufficient to provide a working program, or library, you should add accreditation for the original copyright owner too. 2) In the `You should have received...' paragraph, you should change the reference `along with the GNU C Library', to reflect the name of the actual package you are providing, (regex, in this case). You should also be sure to include the appropriate license file in your package tarball. Regards, Keith. |
From: James S. <jam...@op...> - 2007-04-27 06:33:33
|
On Fri, 2007-04-27 at 06:49 +0100, Keith Marshall wrote: > On Friday 27 April 2007 02:27, James Steward wrote: > > On Thu, 2007-04-26 at 09:53 +0100, Keith MARSHALL wrote: > > > James Steward wrote: > > > > And are similar copyright notices required on my Makefile, def > > > > file, etc? > > > > > > That's your choice, but I'd recommend it. Use similar wording to > > > that which you should find in other files in the package, in > > > respect of it's GPL or LGPL licensing. > > > > How does this look? > > > > /* Extended regular expression matching and search library. > > Copyright (C) 2007 In Chip Design P/L. > > > > This file is part of a cheap and cheerful port of the extended > > regular expression matching and search library (regex), > > taken from the GNU C Library, to MinGW. > > > > Contributed by James Steward <jamessteward _at_ optusnet.com.au>. > > > > The regex library is free software; you can redistribute it and/or > > modify it under the terms of the GNU Lesser General Public > > License as published by the Free Software Foundation; either > > version 2.1 of the License, or (at your option) any later version. > > > > The regex library is distributed in the hope that it will be > > useful, but WITHOUT ANY WARRANTY; without even the implied warranty > > of MERCHANTABILITY or FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE. See the GNU > > Lesser General Public License for more details. > > > > You should have received a copy of the GNU Lesser General Public > > License along with the GNU C Library; if not, write to the Free > > Software Foundation, Inc., 59 Temple Place, Suite 330, Boston, MA > > 02111-1307 USA. */ > > Looks good to me. Just a couple of comments:-- > > 1) Is In Chip Design P/L your own Company? If so, then your copyright > extends only to the files you've added as new; the original copyright > holder still retains an interest in the package, and since your files > alone aren't sufficient to provide a working program, or library, you > should add accreditation for the original copyright owner too. I am an employee of In Chip Design P/L, not the owner. I presume though that the company I work for holds the copyright for the work I do during work time? Do you mean to say that I should accredit the Free Software Foundation, Inc. with some sort of copyright over the files I wrote from scratch? I can't really see why. Or have I answered this with.... The original FSF files I used retain their original license banner with the addition of my "Modified ...." bit. > 2) In the `You should have received...' paragraph, you should change the > reference `along with the GNU C Library', to reflect the name of the > actual package you are providing, (regex, in this case). You should > also be sure to include the appropriate license file in your package > tarball. True. Will do. Regards, James. |
From: Keith M. <kei...@to...> - 2007-04-27 10:44:58
|
James Steward wrote, quoting me: >> 1) Is In Chip Design P/L your own Company? If so, then your copyright >> extends only to the files you've added as new; the original copyright >> holder still retains an interest in the package, and since your files >> alone aren't sufficient to provide a working program, or library, you >> should add accreditation for the original copyright owner too. > > I am an employee of In Chip Design P/L, not the owner. I presume > though that the company I work for holds the copyright for the work I > do during work time? That would be the normal case, yes. > Do you mean to say that I should accredit the Free Software Foundation, > Inc. with some sort of copyright over the files I wrote from scratch? No. I'm saying that, since the files you wrote don't stand alone, but *depend* on additional sources which are already copyright of FSF, you should include a note to that effect. > Ah - after re-reading the LGPL-2.1 doco I think I should get "The Boss" > to sign a disclaimer? Yes please. I would be on a sticky wicket indeed, if I were to distribute your package, without the express permission of the copyright holder. Regards, Keith. |
From: James S. <jam...@op...> - 2007-04-27 06:39:09
|
On Fri, 2007-04-27 at 06:49 +0100, Keith Marshall wrote: > On Friday 27 April 2007 02:27, James Steward wrote: > > > > /* Extended regular expression matching and search library. > > Copyright (C) 2007 In Chip Design P/L. > > > Looks good to me. Just a couple of comments:-- > > 1) Is In Chip Design P/L your own Company? Ah - after re-reading the LGPL-2.1 doco I think I should get "The Boss" to sign a disclaimer? Cheers, James. |
From: Michael G. <mg...@te...> - 2007-04-27 06:53:05
|
Am Freitag, 27. April 2007 03:27 schrieb James Steward: > How does this look? >=20 > /* Extended regular expression matching and search library. > Copyright (C) 2007 In Chip Design P/L. >=20 > This file is part of a cheap and cheerful port of the extended > regular expression matching and search library (regex),=20 > taken from the GNU C Library, to MinGW. >=20 > Contributed by James Steward <jamessteward _at_ optusnet.com.au>. >=20 > The regex library is free software; you can redistribute it and/or > modify it under the terms of the GNU Lesser General Public > License as published by the Free Software Foundation; either > version 2.1 of the License, or (at your option) any later version. >=20 > The regex library is distributed in the hope that it will be useful, > but WITHOUT ANY WARRANTY; without even the implied warranty of > MERCHANTABILITY or FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE. See the GNU > Lesser General Public License for more details. >=20 > You should have received a copy of the GNU Lesser General Public > License along with the GNU C Library; if not, write to the Free > Software Foundation, Inc., 59 Temple Place, Suite 330, Boston, MA > 02111-1307 USA. */ I find this ambigous. Had I not followed this thread from the start I now would assume *YOU* had written the regexp lib instead of providing a port for it. <disclaimer> I'm not a lawyer <7disclaimer> That having saidh how about something like: /* This file is part of a cheap and cheerful port of the extended regular expression matching and search library (regex),=20 taken from the GNU C Library, to MinGW and is Copyright (C) 2007 In Chip Design P/L. Contributed by James Steward <jamessteward _at_ optusnet.com.au>. [possibly add text like: Here is the original copyright notice of the library itself:] Extended regular expression matching and search library. [here comes the _original_ copyright notice of the regexp lib] The regex library is free software; you can redistribute it and/or modify it under the terms of the GNU Lesser General Public License as published by the Free Software Foundation; either version 2.1 of the License, or (at your option) any later version. The regex library is distributed in the hope that it will be useful, but WITHOUT ANY WARRANTY; without even the implied warranty of MERCHANTABILITY or FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE. See the GNU Lesser General Public License for more details. You should have received a copy of the GNU Lesser General Public License along with the GNU C Library; if not, write to the Free Software Foundation, Inc., 59 Temple Place, Suite 330, Boston, MA 02111-1307 USA. */ The rationale is to clearly distinguish between the original files whose copyright you probably do not wish to touch and the files that you actually provide on top of it. Whatever copyright you assign is valid for the later alone and IMO it is helpful to be very clear about that. Ot that's my gutfeeling. > P.S. As it probably shows, I've never had to deal with these sorts of > issues. No problem :-) Best, Michael =2D-=20 Technosis GmbH, Gesch=E4ftsf=FChrer: Michael Gerdau, Tobias Dittmar Sitz Hamburg; HRB 89145 Amtsgericht Hamburg Vote against SPAM - see http://www.politik-digital.de/spam/ Michael Gerdau email: mg...@te... GPG-keys available on request or at public keyserver |
From: James S. <jam...@op...> - 2007-04-27 09:10:10
|
On Fri, 2007-04-27 at 07:37 +0200, Michael Gerdau wrote: > Am Freitag, 27. April 2007 03:27 schrieb James Steward: > > How does this look? > > > > /* Extended regular expression matching and search library. > > Copyright (C) 2007 In Chip Design P/L. > > > > This file is part of a cheap and cheerful port of the extended > > regular expression matching and search library (regex), > > taken from the GNU C Library, to MinGW. > > > > Contributed by James Steward <jamessteward _at_ optusnet.com.au>. > > > > The regex library is free software; you can redistribute it and/or > > modify it under the terms of the GNU Lesser General Public > > License as published by the Free Software Foundation; either > > version 2.1 of the License, or (at your option) any later version. > > > > The regex library is distributed in the hope that it will be useful, > > but WITHOUT ANY WARRANTY; without even the implied warranty of > > MERCHANTABILITY or FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE. See the GNU > > Lesser General Public License for more details. > > > > You should have received a copy of the GNU Lesser General Public > > License along with the GNU C Library; if not, write to the Free > > Software Foundation, Inc., 59 Temple Place, Suite 330, Boston, MA > > 02111-1307 USA. */ > > I find this ambigous. Had I not followed this thread from the start > I now would assume *YOU* had written the regexp lib instead of > providing a port for it. Certainly not my intention :) > <disclaimer> > I'm not a lawyer > <7disclaimer> > > That having saidh how about something like: > /* This file is part of a cheap and cheerful port of the extended > regular expression matching and search library (regex), > taken from the GNU C Library, to MinGW and is > Copyright (C) 2007 In Chip Design P/L. > > Contributed by James Steward <jamessteward _at_ optusnet.com.au>. > > [possibly add text like: Here is the original copyright notice > of the library itself:] > Extended regular expression matching and search library. > [here comes the _original_ copyright notice of the regexp lib] > > The regex library is free software; you can redistribute it and/or > modify it under the terms of the GNU Lesser General Public > License as published by the Free Software Foundation; either > version 2.1 of the License, or (at your option) any later version. > > The regex library is distributed in the hope that it will be useful, > but WITHOUT ANY WARRANTY; without even the implied warranty of > MERCHANTABILITY or FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE. See the GNU > Lesser General Public License for more details. > > You should have received a copy of the GNU Lesser General Public > License along with the GNU C Library; if not, write to the Free > Software Foundation, Inc., 59 Temple Place, Suite 330, Boston, MA > 02111-1307 USA. */ > > The rationale is to clearly distinguish between the original files > whose copyright you probably do not wish to touch and the files that > you actually provide on top of it. Whatever copyright you assign > is valid for the later alone and IMO it is helpful to be very clear > about that. Yes, quite. Thanks for your thoughts Michael. I'll try to do better. For now I'll see what happens from what Tor has already wrapped up. Cheers, James. |
From: Tor L. <tm...@ik...> - 2007-04-27 07:39:33
|
Keith Marshall writes: > the best approach may be just be to create a tarball of all > appropriate files, as a stand alone release, Like http://ftp.gnome.org/pub/gnome/binaries/win32/dependencies/libgnurx-src-2.5.zip ? --tml |
From: James S. <jam...@op...> - 2007-04-27 09:06:38
|
On Fri, 2007-04-27 at 10:39 +0300, Tor Lillqvist wrote: > Keith Marshall writes: > > the best approach may be just be to create a tarball of all > > appropriate files, as a stand alone release, > > Like > http://ftp.gnome.org/pub/gnome/binaries/win32/dependencies/libgnurx-src-2.5.zip > ? Think I'll leave this kind of thing to the experts ;-) Does it compile with MinGW? I'm at home now, so can't easily test 'till Monday morning. Cheers, James. |
From: Keith M. <kei...@to...> - 2007-04-27 11:04:36
|
Tor Lillqvist wrote, quoting me: >> the best approach may be just be to create a tarball of all >> appropriate files, as a stand alone release, > > Like http://ftp.gnome.org/pub/gnome/binaries/win32/dependencies/libgnurx-src-2.5.zip Sadly, as is, that doesn't build with MinGW -- it appears to need Microsnot's `lib': $ make gcc -mthreads -mtune=pentium3 -I . -c -o regex.o regex.c gcc -mthreads -mtune=pentium3 -shared -o libgnurx-0.dll \ -Wl,--enable-auto-image-base -Wl,--out-implib,libgnurx.dll.a \ -Wl,--output-def,libgnurx.def regex.o Creating library file: libgnurx.dll.a cp -p libgnurx.dll.a libregex.a lib -def:libgnurx.def -out:gnurx.lib make: lib: Command not found make: *** [gnurx.lib] Error 127 I'd also prefer to see some reference to the copying conditions, and a notice of copyright, or a disclaimer thereof, and also a disclaimer of warranty, in the Readme and the Makefile. That said, I'm sure it would not be too difficult to adapt. Regards, Keith. |
From: Tor L. <tm...@ik...> - 2007-04-27 11:10:56
|
Keith MARSHALL writes: > Sadly, as is, that doesn't build with MinGW -- it appears to > need Microsnot's `lib': > lib -def:libgnurx.def -out:gnurx.lib Well, obviouosly that is entirely optional, that is there just to produce an import library for the benefit of MSVC users who want to use the library. My policy in general has been to distribute my win32 builds of libraries with import libraries both for gcc and MSVC (in the cases where the software in question is usable both from gcc- and MSVC-built code). > That said, I'm sure it would not be too difficult to adapt. Anybody who likes to, feel free to "adopt" it ;) --tml |
From: Keith M. <kei...@to...> - 2007-04-27 11:27:42
|
Tor Lillqvist wrote, quoting me: >> Sadly, as is, that doesn't build with MinGW -- it appears to >> need Microsnot's `lib': >> >> lib -def:libgnurx.def -out:gnurx.lib > > Well, obviouosly that is entirely optional, Sure. No criticism intended; just pointing out the need for this dependency to be removed, for a MinGW specific package. > Anybody who likes to, feel free to "adopt" it ;) Ok, I'll do that, on behalf of the MinGW Community. Thanks, Keith. |
From: Keith M. <kei...@us...> - 2007-04-30 23:01:35
|
On Friday 27 April 2007 12:27, Keith MARSHALL wrote: > > Anybody who likes to, feel free to "adopt" it ;) > > Ok, I'll do that, on behalf of the MinGW Community. I've imported Tor's original package into CVS, and made a number of changes to the build/packaging system. If anyone would like to preview it, and comment prior to me cutting a set of release tarballs, it may be found here: http://mingw.cvs.sourceforge.net/mingw/regex/ If preferred, anonymous CVS checkout is available with: export CVSROOT CVSROOT=:pserver:ano...@mi...:/cvsroot/mingw cvs login cvs -z3 co -P regex Note that there is no password for anonymous CVS access; just hit <ENTER> when prompted. Regards, Keith. |