Re: [CORE] GPL Source and Copyright Questions

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: "Magnus Hagander" <mha(at)sollentuna(dot)net>
Cc: pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: [CORE] GPL Source and Copyright Questions
Date: 2006-06-22 18:25:17
Message-ID: 2081.1151000717@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

"Magnus Hagander" <mha(at)sollentuna(dot)net> writes:
>>> item #2: Is dllinit.c GPL code?

> I don't think it's needed on Win32. It's not included in my VC++ build,
> because I forgot it :-), and it works just fine.
> The point is that as long as we don't do anything in it (which we
> don't), the runtime supplied default should be just fine.
> I can't speak for cygwin, just standard win32.

The part of it that seems not to be a no-op is

#ifdef __CYGWIN__
__hDllInstance_base = hInst;
#endif /* __CYGWIN__ */

#ifdef __CYGWIN__
_impure_ptr = __imp_reent_data;
#endif

and the whole thing is wrapped in

#if CYGWIN_VERSION_DLL_MAJOR < 1001

so presumably this is only needed for old Cygwin versions. Can anyone
say how old "1001" is and whether we still ought to care about it?

regards, tom lane

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message PFC 2006-06-22 18:28:22 Re: vacuum, performance, and MVCC
Previous Message Rod Taylor 2006-06-22 18:23:15 Re: vacuum, performance, and MVCC