GPL v3 problem list

Jerry James james at xemacs.org
Mon Nov 9 17:00:07 EST 2009 

I went through the GPL v3 wiki and pulled out a list of files that are
standing between us and a GPL v3 release.  This takes advantage of
some information that Stephen Turnbull sent to this list, but which is
not yet reflected on the wiki.  Here's the problem list:

1. build-msw-release.sh: unknown authorship and license
2. INSTALL: can we live with an old FSF documentation license?  Also, some
   information in this file appears to be out of date (e.g., discussion of
   "pure code").
3. etc/editclient.sh: unknown authorship and license
4. etc/gnuserv.1, etc/gnuserv.README, and man page links to etc/gnuserv.1:
   Text in gnuserv.1 implies that gnuserv was originally a distinct product,
   and that it was based on code in Emacs 18.58.  Therefore, it must have had
   a GPL license of some kind, which would have covered these files.  The
   question is, what kind of GPL license did that original have?
5. InstallGuide: it's a joke anyway.  Can we remove it?
6. etc/ctags.1 and etc/etags.1: old FSF documentation license.  Is that okay?
7. etc/idd/drop and etc/idd/dropmsk: identical files with unknown authorship
   and license.  What are these, anyway?  Something to do with drag&drop?
8. etc/sparcworks/sunpro-mailcap: is this even needed anymore?
9. etc/tests/external-widget: appears to be O'Reilly code, but the license is
   unknown.  Is it used anywhere?
10. etc/unicode/other/lao.txt: unknown authorship and license
11. etc/unicode/unicode-consortium/GB12345.TXT: O'Reilly code, with commercial
    use restrictions.  This is a problem for distributions like Fedora that
    are backed by a commercial entity.
12. lib-src/ad2c: unknown license
13. lib-src/emacs.csh: unknown license
14. lib-src/gnudepend.pl: unknown authorship and license
15. lib-src/installexe.sh: unknown authorship and license
16. lib-src/leditcfns.c: unknown authorship and license, but apparently used
    to be in Emacs ("Synched up with: FSF 19.28").
17. lib-src/make-msgfile.c: I think this is obsolete.  Can we get rid of it?
18. lib-src/make-po.c: unknown authorship and license
19. lib-src/wakeup.c: unknown authorship and license
20. lib-src/yow.c: unknown license
21. lisp/dumped-lisp.el: I think this was written by Steve Baur, but it
    contains no license information
22. lisp/site-load.el: definitely written by Steve Baur.  It says "This file
    is part of XEmacs."  Is that good enough?
23. lwlib/lwlib-internal.h: unknown authorship and license
24. man/cl.texi: we are not in compliance with the redistribution clause
25. man/emodules.texi: we are not in compliance with the redistribution clause
26. man/external-widget.texi: unknown authorship and license
27. man/info.texi: we are not in compliance with the redistribution clause
28. man/make-stds.texi: unknown authorship and license
29. man/standards.texi: we are not in compliance with the redistribution clause
30. man/term.texi: unknown authorship and license
31. man/termcap.texi: we are not in compliance with the redistribution clause
32. man/texinfo.texi: we are not in compliance with the redistribution
    clause.  The latest upstream version is GFDL 1.3 or later.
33. man/widget.texi: unknown authorship and license, but the Emacs version is
    GFDL 1.3 or later
34. netinstall/mklink2.c: unknown license
35. netinstall/reginfo.h: unknown license
36. netinstall/version.pl: unknown license
37. nt/ad2c.sed: unknown authorship and license
38. nt/compface.mak: unknown authorship and license
39. nt/tiff.mak: unknown authorship and license
40. nt/x11.patch: unknown authorship and license
41. nt/xemacs.rc: unknown authorship and license
42. nt/Xmd.patch: unknown authorship and license
43. nt/xpm.mak: unknown authorship and license
44. nt/installer/Wise: the entire directory has an unknown license
45. src/hftctl.c: unknown license.  We only need this if we keep AIX support.
    In that case, I have read online that this file is available at
    /usr/lib/samples/hft/hftctl.c on such machines, so why do we need a copy?
46. src/offix-cursors.h: unknown authorship and license
47. src/ppc.ldscript: unknown authorship and license
48. src/tooltalk.doc: unknown authorship and license, and this is the wrong
    place for it anyway
49. src/xmu.h: probably an MIT license, since it was derived from X sources.
    If we only support systems with native Xmu support, we can get rid of this
    and xmu.c.
50. src/s/aix4-2.h: Emacs version is GPL v3 or later
51. src/s/cygwin.sc: unknown authorship and license
52. src/s/darwin.h: Emacs version is GPL v3 or later
53. src/s/freebsd.h: Emacs version is GPL v3 or later
54. src/s/hpux10.h: Emacs has hpux10-20.h, which is GPL v3 or later
55. src/s/hpux10-shr.h: unknown authorship and license
56. src/s/hpux11.h: Emacs version has no explicit license statement
57. src/s/hpux11-shr.h: unknown authorship and license
58. src/s/irix6-0.h: Emacs has irix6-5.sh, which is GPL v3 or later
59. src/s/netbsd.h: Emacs version is GPL v3 or later
60. src/s/openbsd.h: Emacs version has no explicit license statement
61. src/s/sol2.h: Emacs has sol2-3.h, sol2-4.h, sol2-5.h, sol2-6.h, and
    sol2-10.h, some of which are explicitly GPL v3 or later, and some of which
    have no explicit license statement.
62. src/s/usg5-4-2.h: Emacs version is GPL v3 or later
63. tests/auc-tex-test: Is this still useful?
64. tests/frame.el: unknown authorship and license
65. tests/glyph-test.el: unknown authorship and license
66. tests/gutter-test.el: unknown authorship and license
67. tests/sigpipe.c: unknown license
68. tests/autoconf/regressiontest.pl: unknown license
69. tests/DLL/dltest.c: unknown authorship and license
70. tests/Dnd/droptest.el: unknown license
71. tests/Dnd/droptest.sh: unknown license
72. tests/tooltalk: all unknown authorship and license

The following files are also problematic, but will vanish in a puff of
smoke if we adopt my proposal to drop support for ancient systems.
Notice that fully half of our problems disappear just by adopting that
proposal.

1. etc/emacskeys.sco: if we drop SCO support.
2. etc/emacsstrs.sco: if we drop SCO support.
3. src/unexencap.c: if we drop support for COFF platforms
4. src/m/alliant1.h
5. src/m/alliant4q.h
6. src/m/gould-np1.h
7. src/m/ibm370aix.h
8. src/m/is386.h
9. src/m/mips4.h
10. src/m/ncr386.h
11. src/m/news-risc.h
12. src/m/paragon.h
13. src/m/pmax.h
14. src/m/pymips.h
15. src/m/sgi3000.h
16. src/m/sun3.h
17. src/m/sun3-68881.h
18. src/m/sun3-fpa.h
19. src/m/sun3-soft.h
20. src/m/tandem-s2.h
21. src/s/3700.h
22. src/s/386-ix.h
23. src/s/386bsd.h
24. src/s/aix3-2.h
25. src/s/aix3-2-5.h
26. src/s/aix4.h
27. src/s/aix4-1.h
28. src/s/alliant.h
29. src/s/alliant-2800.h
30. src/s/altos.h
31. src/s/amdahl.h
32. src/s/bsd386.h
33. src/s/bsdos2.h
34. src/s/bsdos2-1.h
35. src/s/bsdos3.h
36. src/s/bsdos4.h
37. src/s/cxux7.h
38. src/s/decosf1-2.h
39. src/s/decosf1-3.h
40. src/s/decosf3-1.h
41. src/s/decosf3-2.h
42. src/s/decosf4-0.h
43. src/s/domain.h
44. src/s/esix.h
45. src/s/esix5r4.h
46. src/s/ewsux5r4.h
47. src/s/hpux8.h
48. src/s/hpux8-shr.h
49. src/s/hpux9.h
50. src/s/hpux9-shr.h
51. src/s/hpux9-x11r4.h
52. src/s/hpux9shxr4.h
53. src/s/irix4-0.h
54. src/s/irix5-0.h
55. src/s/irix5-1.h
56. src/s/irix5-2.h
57. src/s/irix5-3.h
58. src/s/isc2-2.h
59. src/s/isc3-0.h
60. src/s/isc4-0.h
61. src/s/isc4-1.h
62. src/s/mach-bsd4-3.h
63. src/s/osf1.h
64. src/s/riscos5.h
65. src/s/sco5-shr.h
66. src/s/sco7.h
67. src/s/sunos4-0.h
68. src/s/sunos4-0-shr.h
69. src/s/sunos4-1.h
70. src/s/sunos4-1-shr.h
71. src/s/sunos4-1-1.h
72. src/s/sunos4-1-2.h
73. src/s/sunos4-1-2-shr.h
74. src/s/sunos4-1-3.h
75. src/s/sunos4-1-3-shr.h
76. src/s/sunos4-1-4.h
77. src/s/sunos4-1-4-shr.h
78. src/s/umips.h

Also, is tooltalk still used on Solaris?  If not, we can get rid of a
few more problems by dropping tooltalk support.
-- 
Jerry James
http://www.jamezone.org/

More information about the XEmacs-Beta mailing list