eliminate writeln et comp?

[Fawzi Mohamed]

On 2009-03-21 20:19:15 +0100, Fawzi Mohamed <fmohamed at mac.com> said:

> On 2009-03-21 14:23:51 +0100, Daniel Keep <daniel.keep.lists at gmail.com> said:
> 
>> 
>> Christopher Wright wrote:
>>> Daniel Keep wrote:
>>>> 
>>>> Christopher Wright wrote:
>>>>> Daniel Keep wrote:
>>>>>> When was the last time you had to put this in your GCC-compiled
>>>>>> programs?
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> "Portions of this program Copyright (C) Free Software Foundation.  Uses
>>>>>> glibc."
>>>>> Executable code resulting from compilation is not a work derived from
>>>>> GCC.
>>>>> 
>>>>> glibc is extremely difficult to link statically and is distributed under
>>>>> the LGPL, so no copyright notice is necessary.
>>>>> 
>>>>> If dmd had good support for dynamic linking, this wouldn't be nearly as
>>>>> much of an issue. Sadly, ddl seems to be on hiatus, and at any rate, it
>>>>> can't be applied to the runtime.
>>>> 
>>>> I think you're missing my point.  I'm saying that a standard library
>>>> shouldn't require you to insert legal disclaimers or attribution notices
>>>> into your program or its documentation.
>>>> 
>>>> A standard library should be be as invisible as possible in this regard.
>>>> 
>>>> -- Daniel
>>> 
>>> Right. It's invisible with glibc because you link to it dynamically, and
>>> because everyone installs it by default. Druntime has neither of these
>>> advantages.
>> 
>> I'm not talking about distribution of the actual library machine code,
>> I'm talking about the LEGAL ISSUES.  Tango's license apparently requires
>> you to explicitly include attribution for Tango in your program.  This
>> means it's possible to naively compile "Hello, World" with Tango,
>> distribute it and break the law.
>> 
>> That glibc uses dynamic linking is immaterial: that there is no way to
>> avoid the legal issues with Tango no matter what you do is the point I'm
>> trying to make.
>> 
>>   -- Daniel
> 
> This is bullshit, if you look at the header of c stdio.h you extremely 
> likely to find exactly the same disclaimer (at least I did find it).
> 
> If in your program you have an "about" and copyright, or you have 
> documentation to it, then yes you should credit the inclusion of tango 
> if you use the BSD license.
> 
> If you want to avoid this then you should use the AFL license (which 
> yes is incompatible with GPLv2).
> 
> This if looking more and more like FUD.
> 
> Fawzi

Sorry if I reacted a little too vehemently

Fawzi