In article <200503251337.32311.phil@cs.wwu.edu>,
Phil Nelson  <phil@cs.wwu.edu> wrote:
>-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
>Hash: SHA1
>
>On Friday 25 March 2005 12:05, Jason Thorpe wrote:
>> There has already been some private discussion about replacing bc/
>> dc.  I do not know the heritage of the OpenBSD versions, but Anders  
>> Magnussen was looking at the now-freed-up old AT&T versions.  I'll  
>> let him elaborate further.
>
>The OpenBSD versions started with the old AT&T versions.  The math library is 
>a slightly modified version of the AT&T version.    The AT&T version that was 
>recently made free still contains a bug that was documented in the paper:
>Ingo Dittmer, ACM Signum, April 1993, page 8-11.    
>
>The AT&T dc was modified by the OpenBSD people to now use the math routines 
>found in the openssl library (crypto/bn).   This fixed the bug listed above, 
>but the performance of OpenBSD bc/dc is still not as good as GNU bc for most 
>cases as shown in a different post on this thread.  In fact, there still are 
>places where GNU bc can do computations that OpenBSD dc can't.
>
>I still believe that NetBSD shouldn't replace a GNU tool with an inferior tool 
>just to get rid of the GPL.  

Phil, you said that you would dual-license bc, and import that... This was a
while ago. What happened?

christos