[libcxx-commits] [PATCH] D98207: [SystemZ][z/OS] Missing wchar functions libc++

Muiez Ahmed via Phabricator via libcxx-commits libcxx-commits at lists.llvm.org
Tue Mar 16 11:51:51 PDT 2021

muiez added a comment.

In D98207#2629675 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D98207#2629675>, @ldionne wrote:

> In D98207#2629651 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D98207#2629651>, @curdeius wrote:
>> @ldionne, then something needs to be done with support/solaris that has almost the same license, no?
>> https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/tree/main/libcxx/src/support/solaris
> Yes indeed, I believe those would need to be LLVM licensed. Those support files were added back in 2012 and there's a README explaining it (https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/blob/main/libcxx/src/support/solaris/README), so I'm not sure what the thought was at the time.
> However, regarding new contributions at least, the LLVM developer policy is pretty clear about what licensing is acceptable: https://llvm.org/docs/DeveloperPolicy.html#copyright-license-and-patents.

Thanks for the notice. After looking through the LLVM developer policy, there is the following statement:

> The scope of relicensing is all code that is considered part of the LLVM project, including the main LLVM repository, runtime libraries (compiler_rt, OpenMP, etc), Polly, and all other subprojects. There are a few exceptions:
> - Code imported from other projects (e.g. Google Test, Autoconf, etc) will remain as it is. This code isn’t developed as part of the LLVM project, it is used by LLVM.

The copyright in this patch (and in solaris) mentions that the code is from the FreeBSD libc project. Maybe this falls into the bullet above? If not, are there any suggestions/alternatives to move forward?

  rG LLVM Github Monorepo



More information about the libcxx-commits mailing list