Bug#979102: Legally problematic GPL-3+ readline dependency

2021-11-09 Thread Bastian Germann
Hi Camm, On 09.11.21 23:12, Camm Maguire wrote: But in any case, I no longer understand the premise of this bug, unless it was your understanding that the source was gplv2*only* instead of "or any later version". Yes, this was the premise and that is what debian/copyright claims at the

Bug#979102: Legally problematic GPL-3+ readline dependency

2021-11-09 Thread Camm Maguire
Greetings! I've uploaded a gcl and maxima closing this to see how it goes. This will require changing the build-depends of every reverse gcl dependency, which is a little annoying but ok I suppose. The obvious alternative is to stick with readline and indicate that the binary is gclv3, as I do

Bug#979102: Legally problematic GPL-3+ readline dependency

2021-10-13 Thread Bastian Germann
Hi Camm, I think the runtime cannot distinguish between libraries because it is the library that gcl is linked with that is loaded. You can also compile gcl with build dependency libeditreadline-dev if you remove the RL_READLINE_VERSION check that is introduced with patch Version_2_6_13pre12.

Bug#979102: Legally problematic GPL-3+ readline dependency

2021-10-12 Thread Camm Maguire
Greetings, and thanks for this! It would be nice to migrate to editreadline. GCL at present constructs a binary license banner indicating GPL'ed components. How would runtime gcl distinguish between these two libraries of the same name? Take care, Bastian Germann writes: > Control: found -1

Bug#979102: Legally problematic GPL-3+ readline dependency

2021-10-12 Thread Bastian Germann
Control: found -1 5.44.0-3 On Sat, 2 Jan 2021 18:48:19 +0100 Bastian Germann wrote: However, that is orphaned in Debian, so libeditreadline-dev should be preferred, which does not compile with your package without any patch. It links with the BSD-licensed libedit library which is a readline

Bug#979102: Legally problematic GPL-3+ readline dependency

2021-10-06 Thread Bastian Germann
Severity: serious On Sat, 2 Jan 2021 18:48:19 +0100 Bastian Germann wrote: Package: maxima Severity: important This package depends on libreadline8 which is GPL-3+ licensed. According to debian/copyright parts of your package are GPL-2-only licensed. If that is also (transitively) the case

Bug#979102: Legally problematic GPL-3+ readline dependency

2021-01-02 Thread Bastian Germann
Package: maxima Severity: important This package depends on libreadline8 which is GPL-3+ licensed. According to debian/copyright parts of your package are GPL-2-only licensed. If that is also (transitively) the case for the binaries that link with libreadline.so.8 it might be legally