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! Pete 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 fossology@fossology.org http://fossology.org/mailman/listinfo/fossology
