Thomas Dickey wrote: > > The files /usr/share/common-licenses/GPL and > > /usr/share/common-licenses/LGPL contain a number of formatting and > > minor spelling differences compared to the text files distributed > > by the FSF at <http://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl.txt> and > > <http://www.gnu.org/licenses/lgpl.txt>. You should probably > > distribute the originals. > > hmm: if the files in /usr/share were copied from the same source at > an earlier date, they're just as qualified to be denoted "originals". > > Perhaps you had some other term in mind, such as "revised" or > "updated", but "originals" is inappropriate.
I obviously don't know every detail of the history of the files on both sides, but I strongly suspect, for example, that the FSF address change was made by editing the existing files in the package rather than downloading the updated copies from the FSF; hence the spelling differences like "St" vs "Street". Be that as it may, Debian should, in my opinion, distribute whatever the FSF is distributing at the time, just to decrease the overall randomness in the universe. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
