generated binaries, to make copyright enforcement easier. Our liason with
them (Bradley Kuhn) suggested the following text:
> Copyright (C) YEAR-2006 Erik Andersen, Rob Landley, and others.
> Licensed under GPLv2. See source distribution for full notice.
And the busybox help message seems the least offensive place to put it. (At
some point in the future, I need to strip 128 bytes from the binary to feel
good about this, though. :)
Minor header file cleanup while I was there, since libbb.h already #includes
most of that stuff...
tree, we have the warning about failed inlines (which with our inline
limit set to zero means any usage of the "inline" keyword at all). Note
that setting the inline limit to zero, and using -Werror, both predated
adding the warning about inlines to the tree. So whatever checkin added
that did nothing but break the tree. But oh well.
The second category of superfluous warnings is warning about functions with
no previous declaration. Apparently, if you add ALWAYS_INLINE to an empty
function definition, it considers the sucker undeclared as far as the
warning is concerned. (I.E. it's a buggy warning. I try not to ask the
compiler to generate warnings it can't competently generate.)
This is why I removed "inline" (unbreak allbareconfig), and couldn't replace it
with "ALWAYS_INLINE" (still broke allbareconfig).
We've had -Werror in the tree for quite a while, so adding #warning
somewhat counterproductve way to make comments on the code that belong on the
mailing list anyway.
License" with "BusyBox is licensed under the GNU General Public
License version 2 or later... (This is the same license the Linux kernel
is under...)" Except that the Linux kernel isn't under GPLv2 or later,
it's just under GPLv2.
Now they match again.
I don't know why patch decided to apply this even though it was already in
the tree. I thought the other hunks failed because they were totally
unrelated leakage from Bernhard's tree (which they are; was the a reason
for bundling them in with this fix? Do they have something to do with
the GCC 2.95 fix? I suspect they prevent me from backporting this
patch to 1.2.2 because the header consolidation into libbb.h hadn't
been done yet, and no I'm not fixing it up: if that's the case then
this patch won't be in 1.2.2 due to extraneous changes bundled with it that
prevent a clean backport without rolling a new patch).
