https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1354210
--- Comment #13 from leigh scott <leigh123li...@googlemail.com> --- (In reply to Raphael Groner from comment #9) > Forgot, sorry: > > Unknown or generated > -------------------- > xviewer-1.0.4/jpegutils/jpegint-8a.h > xviewer-1.0.4/jpegutils/transupp-8a.h > > These two files have IJG license, see README.8a file. > https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Licensing/IJG > > Although: > > GPL (v2 or later) > ----------------- > xviewer-1.0.4/jpegutils/jpegint.h > xviewer-1.0.4/jpegutils/transupp-6b.c > xviewer-1.0.4/jpegutils/transupp-6b.h > xviewer-1.0.4/jpegutils/transupp-8a.c > xviewer-1.0.4/jpegutils/transupp.h > > make[2]: Entering directory '/builddir/build/BUILD/xviewer-1.0.4/jpegutils' > CC transupp-6b.lo > CCLD libxviewer-jpegutils.la > make[2]: Leaving directory '/builddir/build/BUILD/xviewer-1.0.4/jpegutils' > > I don't understand. Do we see a (forbidden) try to relicense jpegutils files > from IJG to GPLv2+ and a case of bundling? How are those files relevant for > the project because 'BR: pkgconfig(libjpeg)'? > > AND: > Did you report or ask about the unlicensed files as in comment #6 to > upstream? After your finished busting Mario's arse on the licensing issues you can file a bug against eog for the same (xviewer inherited the licenses from eog). -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component _______________________________________________ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
