similar to: [LLVMdev] llvm license/GPL

On Mon, Jan 15, 2018 at 05:52:02PM +0100, Michael Kruse via llvm-dev wrote: > * The library is named LLVMISL and contained in the lib/ISL folder to > work best with LLVM's component system. The component's name "ISL" was > chosen over "isl" as it matches the capitalization of other > two/three-letter-acronym components. Are the ISL sources themselve put

Hi All, I just wanted to let you know that libc++ and compiler_rt and now dual licensed under *both* the UIUC and MIT license. The reason for this is that the UIUC license (like many BSD licenses) requires that binaries that link LLVM code contain a notice that they are derived from LLVM. This clause doesn't make sense for libraries like libc++ and compiler_rt: these get implicitly added to

Hello, can I use Xapian in a non-free software? ehsan.

On 2019/06/19, Ilia Mirkin wrote: > The bulk SPDX addition made all these files into GPL-2.0 licensed files. > However the remainder of the project is MIT-licensed, these files > (primarily header files) were simply missing the boiler plate and got > caught up in the global update. > > Fixes: b24413180f5 (License cleanup: add SPDX GPL-2.0 license identifier to files with no

I noticed that the GNU GPL file ( usually named COPYING ) is missing from the nightly cvs snapshot, at least in the one I downloaded on may 12 2000 13:45 UTC. There is neighter an URL or regular address to obtain the license text. The README file states that the text is included with the source, but it isn't. Regards, David Balazic --- >8 ---- List archives:

For a project I am porting some of R's source code, and I want to get the license for my project correct, but the top level COPYING file for R's source states GPL v2, but when using: > license() (which also states GPL version 2) points me towards: > RShowDoc('COPYING') which states GPL v3. Which is correct? Thanks for clarification (and the amazing amount of

Using the acronym "GPL" in comments on the management of package repositories led the discussion well away from the issues I wanted to shed light upon, so I have changed the subject tag. Examples of my concerns: 1) I use a package with a non-free component and learn how to work with it efficiently. I'm a retired academic, but still try to recover some costs of the work I do for

whats the license policy of using r as a SaaS with other apps, priced for a fee. I am not sure which license to invoke. regards, ajay [[alternative HTML version deleted]]

Hi all, I'm currently writing an R package and want to declare a GPL2 license. According to the license agreement, I'm supposed to display: "This program is free software; you can redistribute it and/or modify it under the terms of the GNU General Public License as published by the Free Software Foundation ... See the GNU General Public License for more details."

Hello, I am trying to set up a stream server for audio archives. I've just tried Icecast2 / Ices, and it is really good stuff, but I cannot yet get what I want : streaming on demand. I would like the user to just "click and stream" on the web page (and not listen to a stream that is already running). I don't know if it is possible with Icecast/Ices. Any suggestions would be

On Jul 6, 2011, at 12:47 PM, Tor Gunnar Houeland wrote: > On 07/06/2011 07:10 PM, Chris Lattner wrote: >> On Jul 6, 2011, at 1:55 AM, Tor Gunnar Houeland wrote: >> >>>> There is no need to include any notices in the binaries of an application built with clang, or some with some other application that links to the LLVM runtime libraries that are dual licensed.

hi there, can anyone help me on the topic of frag polynoms? i just heard of a friend of mine, that i could build in a functioon called fragpoly (he was talking of such a function in the 'stata' language) in order to improve my process of finding an optimal linear model. instead of trying a vast amount of transformed inputdata to find the best fit and then step backwards down to e.g.

On 07/06/2011 07:10 PM, Chris Lattner wrote: > On Jul 6, 2011, at 1:55 AM, Tor Gunnar Houeland wrote: > >>> There is no need to include any notices in the binaries of an application built with clang, or some with some other application that links to the LLVM runtime libraries that are dual licensed. >> Thanks for your response. Is this ability to distribute binaries without

Hi there, As I could not find a direct maintainer email address, I'm sending this to the mailing list. SysLinux, being a GPL product, is being sold under a very restrictive license without even offering the sources to the public. I've written up my findings here: http://www.palli.nl/~ivo/rdp/ Please have a look for yourself. Regards, Ivo Palli

Hello all, Sorry for this email not directly related to R developement. I just come from a nice demonstration session from Scitegic about their Pipeline Pilot (PP) software, and especially their 'R collection' which brings R calculations into the software (http://www.scitegic.com/documents/RStats_Collection.pdf). I looked carefully on the way they do it: they pass data from PP to R

On 07/07/2011 02:25 AM, Chris Lattner wrote: > I, and many other reasonable people, consider the phrase: > > "The above copyright notice and this permission notice shall be included in all copies or substantial portions of the Software." > > ... to be talking about *copies of the software*. A binary is not a copy of the software, it is a lump of bits derived from it. >

Hi, We currently have a downstream patch (attached) which implements some new addressing modes that enable position-independent code for small embedded systems. Is this something that would be accepted upstream? I think the ARM backend changes are fairly uncontroversial, but the clang changes introduce a lot of ROPI/RWPI specific changes in otherwise target-independent code. If the clang changes

My impression from reading http://llvm.org/docs/DeveloperPolicy.html#clp is that it's intended to be possible to compile programs using llvm and distribute the resulting binaries freely. This does not seem to be the case. I'm assuming no portion of LLVM is included in the compiled binaries, only the runtime library components, so that the compiled binaries are not derived from LLVM.

On Nov 11, 2012, at 5:13 PM, Meador Inge <meadori at codesourcery.com> wrote: > On Nov 11, 2012, at 12:44 AM, Chris Lattner wrote: > >> >> On Nov 10, 2012, at 10:43 AM, Joe Abbey <jabbey at arxan.com> wrote: >> >>> Hello, >>> >>> Chris's "keynote" at the LLVM Developers' Conference included a call for code

Hi, I've got a wee question. I log on to system A and there I'll load my .profile. From there I start an ssh session to system B and there I would like to have the same .profile as on system A. Is there a way I can use ssh for that ?? The reason I'm asking this is that on system B its a functional unix account and not everyone wants to have the same .profile. I cant use automount