From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============7924586806227552530=="
MIME-Version: 1.0
From: Al Stone <ahs3 at redhat.com>
Subject: Re: [Devel] [PATCH] explicit licensing file?
Date: Wed, 21 Aug 2013 10:10:58 -0600
Message-ID: <5214E692.6070200@redhat.com>
In-Reply-To: 94F2FBAB4432B54E8AACC7DFDE6C92E36FECF542@ORSMSX103.amr.corp.intel.com
List-ID: <devel@acpica.org>
To: devel@acpica.org

--===============7924586806227552530==
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

On 08/21/2013 08:53 AM, Moore, Robert wrote:
> ACPICA project would have to check with the intel legal department on thi=
s.
>
> It probably would be easiest for us to ensure that the header exists in e=
very released source file (i.e., scripts, makefiles, and tests)
>
> Bob
>

Right, that seems like a reasonable option, also.  I'll take a look
at the scripts that create the Unix(tm) tarballs and see if I can
patch those to fix up the headers instead.

-- =

ciao,
al
-----------------------------------
Al Stone
Software Engineer
Red Hat, Inc.
ahs3(a)redhat.com
-----------------------------------

--===============7924586806227552530==--