bbs@HANKEL.RUTGERS.EDU (12/17/89)
Hi y'all. I don't remember who claimed I broke the rules of posting a hack-up of GNU getopt, but the only rule I broke, it seems to me, on third look, is to put the hacking notice before the GNU copyright notice and not after it. I need not do more than is required. Specifically, I need not include one of the longer-winded speeches. Furthermore, all instructions as to what to do with the code were included. Where one may be fooled is in thinking it would be in a separate file. It isn't. Since all I distributed was getopt, I found a notice _within the source file_ satisfactory. The rest was readme's and makefiles, not code. So I _didn't_ goof, except in the inconsequential way given above. Please do not accuse one of breaking the GNU agreement just because he complied in a way you didn't expect. -- Barry Schwartz, Chief SAPsucker bbs@cdspr.rutgers.edu Grad Student, Dept. of Elec. and Comp. Engg. bschwart@elbereth.rutgers.edu Rutgers University College of Engg. bbs@hankel.rutgers.edu Piscataway, NJ 08854 U.S.A. rutgers!cdspr!bbs