[Privoxy-devel] new windows build system

[Lee]

On 5/29/16, Fabian Keil <fk at fabiankeil.de> wrote:
> Lee <ler762 at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> On 4/30/16, Fabian Keil <fk at fabiankeil.de> wrote:
>> > Lee <ler762 at gmail.com> wrote:
>> >
>> >> On 4/28/16, Fabian Keil <fk at fabiankeil.de> wrote:
>> >> > I've contacted the FSF to ask if they can change the wording of the
>> >> > exception so it covers Privoxy as well.
>> >>
>> >> I'd be surprised if they changed the wording of the GPL.  I wouldn't
>> >> expect more than an additional FAQ entry to clarify matters.  In any
>> >> case, please let me know their answer.
>> >
>> > I didn't request a change of the GPL itself, but a change of the
>> > exception they added for config.sub and config.guess. From the header:
>> >
>> > # As a special exception to the GNU General Public License, if you
>> > # distribute this file as part of a program that contains a
>> > # configuration script generated by Autoconf, you may include it under
>> > # the same distribution terms that you use for the rest of that
>> > # program.  This Exception is an additional permission under section 7
>> > # of the GNU General Public License, version 3 ("GPLv3").
>>
>> Did you ever get an answer?
>
> I've gotten an auto-reply from the ticket system but no human response yet:
>
> | This message has been automatically generated in response to a
> | licensing question you sent to the Free Software Foundation, with
> subject:
> |	"GPLv3 exception for config.guess and config.sub".
> |
> | There is no need to reply to this message right now.  Your request has
> | been assigned an ID of [gnu.org #1105153].
>
>> I haven't looked to see what it would take to get current -- maybe
>> changing our code would be enough??  But it'd be nice to get rid of
>> all the "obsolete" stuff:
>
> How could "changing our code" not be enough?

If using something with a GPLv3 license is required to move away from
obsolete functions.

Lee