Hi Mary,

Yes, sorry, I neglected to mention that I'm on FOSSology version 1.3.0
(code revision 4518).

FWIW, from my viewpoint, to be clear, it is _very_ important to
indicate such "less interesting" licenses such as BSD because that
would allow me to focus my time first on those files that _only_ have
"more interesting" licenses such as GPL.)

Thanks again!

On Thu, Aug 11, 2011 at 4:51 PM, Laser, Mary wrote:
> Hi Pete,
> Based on your email,  I see you're using a (older?) version of FOSSology 
> which includes the (deprecated) bsam analyzer.  Your first question below 
> refers to a table generated using bsam.  Since we're no longer supporting 
> bsam, I don't have the means to reproduce your result in order to address 
> your question.  Maybe some other bsam user knows?
> I did download the openssl tar file and reproduce your results using nomos 
> license analysis.  Yes, clearly there is a BSD reference in the cmll file.  
> It's not clear if this is a bug OR if nomos has chosen to not to enumerate 
> this license in favor of more "interesting" licenses. I will file a bug to 
> see which it is.
> Thanks for pointing it out.
> Mary
> Mary Laser
> The FOSSology Project
> http://fossology.org
fossology mailing list

Reply via email to