Thomas Dickey wrote: > On Thu, 4 Jun 2009, [email protected] wrote: > >>> That wording could, for example, be construed to prohibit using the >>> skeleton in an application that generates parsers from a meta >>> description for xkb and the like. >> Not really. Such a generator would just create .y files as well, not use >> the Bison skeleton directly. > > Perhaps the program you have in mind is that simple, but I wasn't > talking about a trivial case. > >> The point is that the skeleton is part of a generated file, and as long >> as it is used as such, there are no restrictions. Ordinary GPL terms >> would apply only if you took the skeleton from the generated file, and >> used it for something else -- why would you want to do that? > > One point to be made is that the source which was added to the tree > has additional restrictions which do not apply to other files.
I'm not sure I see where this additional restriction comes from, because... > As a special exception, you may create a larger work that contains > part or all of the Bison parser skeleton and distribute that work > under terms of your choice, so long as that work isn't itself a > parser generator using the skeleton or a modified version thereof > as a parser skeleton. The larger work (the X server) isn't a parser generator, and so can be distributed under the chosen terms (X11 license) > (The other point is questioning whether there was a technical reason for > the use of bison - perhaps not) We are entirely at the mercy of what autoconf decides to use for yacc on the machine where 'make dist' is done. And in this case I suspect that yacc was just a wrapper for 'bison -y'. _______________________________________________ xorg-devel mailing list [email protected] http://lists.x.org/mailman/listinfo/xorg-devel
