• meppl (30/30) Aug 28 2017 i incidentally noticed the FAQ claims the dmd-backend would be
• Jonathan M Davis via Digitalmars-d (6/36) Aug 28 2017 Both the frontend and backend are now entirely under the Boost license.
• meppl (3/8) Aug 29 2017 okay, PR was sent

meppl <mephisto nordhoff-online.de> writes:

i incidentally noticed the FAQ claims the dmd-backend would be 
licensed under a norton license. i thought it is an outdated 
information:
https://dlang.org/faq.html#q5


however, i also checked the source code and it turned out that 
some files dont contain the string "boost":
$ fgrep -iLR boost src/ddmd/backend/
src/ddmd/backend/bcomplex.h
src/ddmd/backend/dt.h
src/ddmd/backend/backend.txt
src/ddmd/backend/code_stub.h
src/ddmd/backend/dwarf2.h
src/ddmd/backend/dwarf.d
src/ddmd/backend/mach.d
src/ddmd/backend/md5.c
src/ddmd/backend/md5.h
src/ddmd/backend/bcomplex.c
src/ddmd/backend/mscoff.d
src/ddmd/backend/dwarf2.d
src/ddmd/backend/xmm.h
src/ddmd/backend/cv4.d
src/ddmd/backend/mscoff.h
src/ddmd/backend/mach.h
src/ddmd/backend/dwarf.h
src/ddmd/backend/melf.h
src/ddmd/backend/md5.d
src/ddmd/backend/bcomplex.d
src/ddmd/backend/cv4.h


do you think the missing license headers are relevant? If not, i 
would make a pull request for the FAQ

Jonathan M Davis via Digitalmars-d <digitalmars-d puremagic.com> writes:

On Tuesday, August 29, 2017 06:43:19 meppl via Digitalmars-d wrote:
 i incidentally noticed the FAQ claims the dmd-backend would be
 licensed under a norton license. i thought it is an outdated
 information:
 https://dlang.org/faq.html#q5


 however, i also checked the source code and it turned out that
 some files dont contain the string "boost":
 $ fgrep -iLR boost src/ddmd/backend/
 src/ddmd/backend/bcomplex.h
 src/ddmd/backend/dt.h
 src/ddmd/backend/backend.txt
 src/ddmd/backend/code_stub.h
 src/ddmd/backend/dwarf2.h
 src/ddmd/backend/dwarf.d
 src/ddmd/backend/mach.d
 src/ddmd/backend/md5.c
 src/ddmd/backend/md5.h
 src/ddmd/backend/bcomplex.c
 src/ddmd/backend/mscoff.d
 src/ddmd/backend/dwarf2.d
 src/ddmd/backend/xmm.h
 src/ddmd/backend/cv4.d
 src/ddmd/backend/mscoff.h
 src/ddmd/backend/mach.h
 src/ddmd/backend/dwarf.h
 src/ddmd/backend/melf.h
 src/ddmd/backend/md5.d
 src/ddmd/backend/bcomplex.d
 src/ddmd/backend/cv4.h


 do you think the missing license headers are relevant? If not, i
 would make a pull request for the FAQ

Both the frontend and backend are now entirely under the Boost license.
Anything that says differently is out-of-date, but the change was recent
enough, and there have been enough places to change, that it's no surprise
if you've found some places where it hasn't been updated yet.

- Jonathan M Davis

meppl <mephisto nordhoff-online.de> writes:

On Tuesday, 29 August 2017 at 06:56:13 UTC, Jonathan M Davis 
wrote:
 On Tuesday, August 29, 2017 06:43:19 meppl via Digitalmars-d 
 wrote:
 ...

 Both the frontend and backend are now entirely under the Boost 
 license. ...

okay, PR was sent