Dave Page wrote:

>/* A Bison parser, made by GNU Bison 1.875.  */
>
Given that this file appears to be produced *by* Bison, and given this 
exception:

>/* As a special exception, when this file is copied by Bison into a
>   Bison output file, you may use that output file without restriction.
>   This special exception was added by the Free Software Foundation
>   in version 1.24 of Bison.  */
>
it would appear that the file can be used without restriction.  Any 
output from bison or flex is non-GPL, AIUI.  Any input *into* bison, 
which is GPL'd before processing, *is* restricted.  Given that bison 
doesn't take .h files as input, doesn't it make sense that this was 
produced *by* bison, and thus unrestricted?

ahp

In response to

• GPL code issue? at 2003-09-30 15:13:14 from Dave Page

pgsql-hackers by date

Next:	From: Andreas Joseph Krogh	Date: 2003-10-01 14:00:08
	Subject: Patch for allowing multiple -t <table-name> options for pg_dump
Previous:	From: Marc G. Fournier	Date: 2003-10-01 13:41:18
	Subject: Re: Thoughts on maintaining 7.3

pgadmin-hackers by date

Next:	From: Dave Page	Date: 2003-10-01 14:01:25
	Subject: Re: utffile.cpp & expatd.lib
Previous:	From: Andreas Pflug	Date: 2003-10-01 13:52:17
	Subject: Re: utffile.cpp & expatd.lib