From: Martin Stromberg <eplmst AT epl DOT ericsson DOT se>
Message-Id: <200210180731.JAA21814@lws256.lu.erisoft.se>
Subject: Re: Licences in 2.04 DSMs [PATCH]
To: djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com
Date: Fri, 18 Oct 2002 09:31:58 +0200 (MET DST)
In-Reply-To: <E182CGg-0000Zs-00@phekda.freeserve.co.uk> from "Richard Dawe" at Oct 17, 2002 04:45:16 PM
X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.5 PL3]
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Reply-To: djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com
Errors-To: nobody AT delorie DOT com
X-Mailing-List: djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com
X-Unsubscribes-To: listserv AT delorie DOT com
Precedence: bulk

> Index: djdev204/djdev204.dsm
> ===================================================================
> RCS file: /cvs/djgpp/djgpp/distrib/p/djdev204/djdev204.dsm,v
> retrieving revision 1.1
> diff -p -u -3 -r1.1 djdev204.dsm
> --- djdev204/djdev204.dsm	17 Oct 2002 11:08:56 -0000	1.1
> +++ djdev204/djdev204.dsm	17 Oct 2002 15:31:01 -0000
> @@ -18,7 +18,7 @@ sources-dsm: djlsr204
>  manifest: djdev204
>  
>  short-description: DJGPP Development Kit and Runtime
> -license: Mostly the GNU General Public License with modifications
> +license: Mostly the GNU General and Library General Public Licenses with some allowed exceptions - see copying.dj.

Why the "Mostly" word. Wouldn't the statement be correct without
mostly? Mostly is so indefinite.


Right,

						MartinS