We've ifdef'd out the copyright strings for some time now. Go ahead and
remove the ifdefs. Plus whatever other detritis was left over from other
recent removals. These copyright strings are present in the comments and
are largely from CSRG's attempt at adding their copyright to every
binary file (which modern interpretations of the license doesn't
require).
Sponsored by: Netflix
Remove ancient SCCS tags from the tree, automated scripting, with two
minor fixup to keep things compiling. All the common forms in the tree
were removed with a perl script.
Sponsored by: Netflix
In most cases, usage does not return, so mark them as __dead2. For the
cases where they do return, they have not been marked __dead2.
Reviewed by: imp
Pull Request: https://github.com/freebsd/freebsd-src/pull/735
Mainly focus on files that use BSD 3-Clause license.
The Software Package Data Exchange (SPDX) group provides a specification
to make it easier for automated tools to detect and summarize well known
opensource licenses. We are gradually adopting the specification, noting
that the tags are considered only advisory and do not, in any way,
superceed or replace the license texts.
Special thanks to Wind River for providing access to "The Duke of
Highlander" tool: an older (2014) run over FreeBSD tree was useful as a
starting point.
Renumber cluase 4 to 3, per what everybody else did when BSD granted
them permission to remove clause 3. My insistance on keeping the same
numbering for legal reasons is too pedantic, so give up on that point.
Submitted by: Jan Schaumann <jschauma@stevens.edu>
Pull Request: https://github.com/freebsd/freebsd/pull/96
is in accordance with the information provided at
ftp://ftp.cs.berkeley.edu/pub/4bsd/README.Impt.License.Change
Also add $FreeBSD$ to a few files to keep svn happy.
Discussed with: imp, rwatson
Add some constness to avoid some warnings.
Remove use register keyword.
Deal with missing/unneeded extern/prototypes.
Some minor type changes/casts to avoid warnings.
Reviewed by: md5
is wrong, even though our C compiler doesn't understand that exit() eats
control of the program, and as such can sometimes complain that main() reaches
the bottom of its body without an explicit return().
Aside from that, the functional usefulness of changing it is effectively nil,
so back it out.
Submitted by: mike
