Boost logo

Boost :

Subject: [boost] boost.config was Re: License of endian and limits in Boost detail
From: Philip Bennefall (philip_at_[hidden])
Date: 2013-03-06 05:48:22

----- Original Message -----
From: "Rob Stewart" <robertstewart_at_[hidden]>
To: <boost_at_[hidden]>
Sent: Wednesday, March 06, 2013 11:37 AM
Subject: Re: [boost] License of endian and limits in Boost detail

On Mar 6, 2013, at 4:49 AM, Philip Bennefall <philip_at_[hidden]> wrote:

> From: "Rob Stewart" <robertstewart_at_[hidden]>
> On Mar 5, 2013, at 2:29 AM, Philip Bennefall <philip_at_[hidden]> wrote:
>> * Permission to use, copy, modify, distribute and sell this software
>> * and its documentation for any purpose is hereby granted without fee,
>> * provided that the above copyright notice appear in all copies and
>> * that both that copyright notice and this permission notice appear
>> * in supporting documentation.
>> This looks to me like it enforces inclusion of the above text in object
>> code distributions,
> IANAL, but I read that as only requiring the copyright notice in copies of
> the source and in the documentation, not in the binaries.
> Do you mean the end user documentation accompanying binaries (e.g. the
> documentation of a derivative work)? That is the part I want to avoid.

That's what I meant, yes. I didn't say it was a good or convenient thing,


The reason I bring it up is because it goes against the Boost software
license, and since a lot of libraries seem to use boost.config and thus this
file in some capacity, I am unsure of what parts of Boost I can use without
including this extra requirement. it would be nice if the maintainer would
look into this.

Philip Bennefall
Unsubscribe & other changes:

Boost list run by bdawes at, gregod at, cpdaniel at, john at