On Wed, 31 Jan 2001, Atsuhito Kohda wrote: >I am interested in gsview which is famous in Windows users >and a kind of ghostview or gv. But I am not sure if its license >permits us to upload to Debian or not. > >(You can get the original source from >http://www.cs.wisc.edu/~ghost/gsview/get36.htm) > >It says as follows: > >---------------------------------- >GSview is copyright by Ghostgum Software Pty Ltd. >GSview is distributed with the Aladdin Free Public Licence. >This licence is contained in the file /usr/share/doc/gsview/LICENCE > >GSview uses pstotext in an external DLL. pstotext was written by >Andrew Birrell and Paul McJones. It is > Copyright (C) 1995-1996, Digital Equipment Corporation. >See the licence in pstotext.txt or pstotext.zip for more details.
locutus:/var/log/snort# apt-cache search pstotext pstotext - Extract text from PostScript and PDF files. looks like this part's going to be redundant anyway >pstoedit is Copyright by Wolfgang Glunz and is licensed with >the GNU Public Licence (GPL). Binaries are included in >GSview with the permission of Wolfgang Glunz. >---------------------------------- locutus:/usr/src# apt-cache search pstoedit pstoedit - PostScript and PDF files to editable vector graphics converter. >I think the first paragraph is okay for non-free because >it is the same with gs-aladdin. > >The second paragraph mentioned pstotext.txt and it is a bit >long so I attatched it after the question on the third paragraph. Looks like the pstotext is the same in the debianized source of pstotext. In fact, I'd wager they were the same. >I guess the third paragraph seems problematic. pstoedit is >under GPL and gsview itself is under AFPL so, generally, >they contradict each other. Is it okay because there is the >permission of Wolfgang Glunz? Why repackage it? >Now the main part of pstotext.txt. <snip--apt-get source pstotext and read it yourself>
