Re: one more copyright-date fix

[Paul Eggert]

Russ Allbery <address@hidden> writes:

> I believe this is specifically referring to the output generated by
> running a command with the --version option.  The notices inside source
> files should include all years.  (I haven't been following closely enough
> to know which this one is.)

This particular notice is inside a Bourne shell file that is
automatically generated by a Bourne shell file that is automatically
generated by Autoconf.  It's not a source file in the traditional GNU
sense, since it's automatically generated; nor is it the output of
--version.  However, it's reasonable for someone to hand-edit this
file, so I think it's more reasonable to treat it as a source file
with respect to copyright notices.