Re: [avr-libc-dev] Is the Caldera license acceptable?

[E. Weddington]

On 16 Oct 2002 at 21:31, Joerg Wunsch wrote:

> While trying to add floating point conversions to vfprintf(), i
> contemplate using the V7 UNIX approach, which uses ecvt(), fcvt(), and
> gcvt() to convert the numbers.  For some reasons, this currently looks
> more promising to me than dtostre()/dtostrf() (in particular, since
> these functions already implement array boundary checks to not
> overflow the resulting string).
> 
> Since old Unices are now opensource, we could use the original
> implementation directly.  However, the Caldera license that made
> these Unices opensource is basically the old 4-clause BSD-style
> license, i. e. it contains the clause with ``All advertising
> materials...'' which GNU folks seem to hate.  So the question is,
> would this be a problem to us (including hosting it on savannah), or
> could we use that code literally?
> 
> The original Caldera document can be found e. g. at
> ftp://minnie.tuhs.org/UnixArchive/Caldera-license.pdf.  I'm
> appending a text translation of it for reference.

I would be loathe to accept it. If any code had the "advertising" 
clause on it, I would not use it on the commercial products that I'm 
working on, or any other products for that matter.

If it does get included, then a caveat had better be put in somewhere 
explaining this to end-users. Doing this could prove to be a head-
ache.

How hard would it be to mod the current dtostr[e|f]() to achieve the 
desired results?

Eric