Hi! reading the bug's page of bug #109 http://bugs.gnewsense.org/Bugs/00109 cracklib2 seems not free (and it was removed) due its unclear licence. But this bug is signed like a dupe of bug 99: http://bugs.gnewsense.org/Bugs/00099 where, in Brian's opinion, the Artistic Licence [1], despite its lack of clearness [2], seems free.
So, how manage these opposite sentences? thanks, [1] Version < 2.0, is not the same licence of cracklib, but they are similar -> http://changelogs.ubuntu.com/changelogs/pool/main/c/cracklib2/cracklib2_2.7-19/cracklib2.copyright [2] http://www.gnu.org/licenses/license-list.html#ArtisticLicense
signature.asc
Description: Questa รจ una parte del messaggio firmata digitalmente
_______________________________________________ gNewSense-dev mailing list [email protected] http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnewsense-dev
