From: John Galt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: Re: is the license of gsview okay? Date: Thu, 1 Feb 2001 21:26:20 -0700 (MST)
> >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 Ah yes, you are right. I just installed pstotext 1.8g-1. > >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 also installed this one just now. > >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? No, no, I do not repackage it ;-) Rather only I did not notice that these were already packaged. Thanks for your clarification and sorry for my lack of investigation. I found that gsview contains only pstotext and it assumes that a system provides pstoedit. So if one removes redundant pstotext then gsview is under AFPL, completely same with gs-aladdin. Thanks again. Regards. -- Debian JP Developer - much more I18N of Debian Atsuhito Kohda <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Department of Math., Tokushima Univ.
