From: "T.E.Dickey" <dickey AT clark DOT net>
Subject: Re: Copyright of flex?
Newsgroups: comp.os.msdos.djgpp
References: <37a1ebdb DOT 12650683 AT news DOT tripnet DOT se> <37A23A87 DOT 31D637D4 AT a DOT crl DOT com>
Organization: Clark Internet Services, Inc., Ellicott City, MD USA
User-Agent: tin/pre-1.4-19990624 ("Dawnrazor") (UNIX) (SunOS/5.6 (sun4u))
Lines: 28
Message-ID: <LQWo3.455$hC5.23642@iad-read.news.verio.net>
Date: Sun, 01 Aug 1999 12:12:27 GMT
NNTP-Posting-Host: 168.143.0.8
X-Complaints-To: abuse AT verio DOT net
X-Trace: iad-read.news.verio.net 933509547 168.143.0.8 (Sun, 01 Aug 1999 12:12:27 GMT)
NNTP-Posting-Date: Sun, 01 Aug 1999 12:12:27 GMT
To: djgpp AT delorie DOT com
DJ-Gateway: from newsgroup comp.os.msdos.djgpp
Reply-To: djgpp AT delorie DOT com

Weiqi Gao <weiqigao AT a DOT crl DOT com> wrote:
> Peter Palotas wrote:
>> I'm wondering what the copyright on flex is? (Or where it is
>> perhaps)...
>> 
>> Is it the same as Bison, i.e. that you can't use it without making all
>> of your code GPL?

no

> The version of flex at the DJGPP repository (flex-2.5-4) carries a BSD
> like license.  The license is in the source archive (flx254s.zip).  The
> documentation (flx254d.zip) archive includes a copy of the GPL, which I
> think is an error.

I agree - the copy at ftp://ftp.gnu.org/pub/gnu/flex states that it has
a slightly modified BSD license.  (The documentation is a puzzle though -
I've seen a more extensive manpage which is not part of the current
distribution; apparently it was subject to different conditions and is
not distributed with flex 2.5.4).

-- the manpage I was looking at was a copy where DEC had pasted their
   copyright onto a somewhat older version of flex ...

-- 
Thomas E. Dickey
dickey AT clark DOT net
http://www.clark.net/pub/dickey