On Thu, Nov 29, 2007 at 02:48:52AM +0000, Ciaran McCreesh wrote: > On Wed, 28 Nov 2007 18:40:27 -0800 > "Robin H. Johnson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > I'm for ranged licenses, but I think attention needs to be paid to the > > syntax. The postfix [] form does nicely separate the version > > information from the actual license name (moreso than the traditional > > CPV atom), but the LGPL[>=2&<3] example looks to be overloading it, > > when we already have AND/OR at the higher level. > > LICENSE="|| ( Eclipse ( LGPL[>=2] LGPL[<3] ) )" > > Which is, Eclipse OR (LGPL v2 up to, but not including LGPLv3). > The ( ) form means something else for package dependencies, and so can't > be used for ranged dependencies. In particular: > ( >=foo/bar-3 <foo-bar/4 ) > will (correctly) be matched if both foo/bar-5 and foo/bar-1 are > installed, which can happen due to slots.
Ok, I revise that for slots then: LICENSE="|| ( Eclipse ( LGPL[>=2] !LGPL[>=3] ) )" (which is more in line with my description of the license string). The !/NEGATION might be inside the [] blocks, since the AND and OR operators are. -- Robin Hugh Johnson Gentoo Linux Developer & Infra Guy E-Mail : [EMAIL PROTECTED] GnuPG FP : 11AC BA4F 4778 E3F6 E4ED F38E B27B 944E 3488 4E85
pgpmN1oQ1zbbU.pgp
Description: PGP signature
