On Fri, May 02, 2003 at 11:21:18PM -0400, Matt Zimmerman wrote:
Package: automake1.6
Version: 1.6.3-5
Severity: serious
I noticed this from a discussion in #148412 about gimp's licensing)
[snip standard MIT/X11 copyright notice and license]
Not only does automake not reproduce these
I've already contacted upstream privately about this and he is all
over it. They will either rewrite it from scratch, or perhaps update
the licensing terms since it seems at one point install.sh was
distributed later on in X11R6 without these licensing terms. I'll keep
you posted.
* Branden
On Wednesday, May 7, 2003, at 03:53 AM, Branden Robinson wrote:
Is your argument that because of the nature of GNU automake, it might
be
causing our users to inadvertently infringe MIT's copyright?
Yes, that's the argument. See the first paragraph under the quoted
material, which reads in
On Wed, May 07, 2003 at 01:15:41PM -0400, Anthony DeRobertis wrote:
Yes, that's the argument. See the first paragraph under the quoted
material, which reads in part:
...but it also automatically installs a copy of install-sh
into automake-using packages when --add-missing is used.
Package: automake1.6
Version: 1.6.3-5
Severity: serious
I noticed this from a discussion in #148412 about gimp's licensing)
mizar:[~] head -16 /usr/share/automake-1.6/install-sh
#!/bin/sh
#
# install - install a program, script, or datafile
# This comes from X11R5 (mit/util/scripts/install.sh).
5 matches
Mail list logo
