> > > I noticied today that the libc man pages are basically the
> > > sections of the daft C99 standard. Giving that it is allowed to
> > > redistibute the draft or any part of it (checked with a member of
> > > the WG14) we should remove them from the repository.
> >
> > Why should we?
> > Isn't it handy to provide those?
>
> The problem is that the C99 specs *cannot* be re distributed
> (important typo in the original mail). In theory, we could
> be taken to court because we are distributing them. The problem
> is that Naveem almost copied verbatim the specs. In order to
> have them we would have to rephrase all the man pages.
Ah yeah, I missed the following email correcting the wording :D
Buuut, while this kind of make sense, this is *everywhere*
in the ecosystem.
Like it's in POSIX that copies almost verbatim the C* standard,
in turn it's also in the “POSIX man-pages” for example.
I'm not sure about the GNU libc man-pages, but I assume it's
pretty well the same. Maybe they changed a word here and there.
Not saying tha the law doesn't apply to us, but apparently
it doesn't apply to some others. xD
> > What would be the goal here?
>
> Don't violate the WG14 document terms of use.
Yeah... Then the easier solution would be not to provide them,
but maybe it can be just a question of having a written agreement
for us to distribute the documentation as part of an implementation
of the standard libc, like I suppose most other
documentation implementation have (or don't have)?
--
To unsubscribe send a mail to scc-dev+unsubscribe_at_simple-cc.org
Received on Mon 21 Apr 2025 - 17:25:48 CEST