for unknown reasons i received this mail only today. Sorry for the late
Am 7.8.2007 schrieb "Petter Reinholdtsen" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>> At the moment josm unfortunately needs to go to contrib, too.
>I am all for including contrib packages on the live images. The
>problem is their non-free dependencies.
> I'm not sure we are allowed
>according to their license to distribute them.
This needs to be checked on a case-by-case basis then.
I don't think this is a problem (IANAL) for SUN's license unless we can
live with their
"Operating System Distributor License" which includes besides 'usual'
nasty things like paragraph 2:
(f) you agree to defend and indemnify Sun
and its licensors from and against any damages, costs, liabilities,
settlement amounts and/or expenses (including attorneys' fees)
incurred in connection with any claim, lawsuit or action by any
third party that arises or results from (i) the use or distribution
of your Operating System, or any part thereof, in any manner, or
(ii) your use or distribution of the Software in violation of the
terms of this Agreement or applicable law. You shall not be
obligated under Section 2(f)(i) if such claim would not have
occurred but for a modification made to your Operating System by
someone not under your direction or control, and you were in
compliance with all other terms of this Agreement. If the Software
README file permits certain files to be replaced or omitted from
your distribution, then any such replacement(s) or omission(s)
shall not be considered a breach of Section 2(a).
> Also, for the SUN Java
>packages, there is a nasty license agreement question to answer, and
>we can not really answer it on behalf of the users. :(
>Not quite sure how to handle this. I'm testing a build with both
>contrib and non-free enabled, and will see what the log say. :)
We shouldn't ask for license acceptance each time someone uses the cd
as only few packages are affected. The only way i see at the moment is
a wrapper around these programs (or bin/java) that shows the license to
when it is started the first time and perhaps put a general note about it
There is a FAQ in the license file that deals with this:
17. What do you mean by "Present for acceptance end user licenses"
(from #8 above)? Do I have to create a click-through license
display when a user first installs or runs the JDK? Must my users
accept the license?
Your users must agree to the license terms for the JDK before
installing it. While you aren't required to show the DLJ on first
use or installation, you must inform them that the JDK is licensed
software and that they must agree to the license before using
it. A click-through mechanism is the preferred way to do this, but
at a minimum you must present the license by some appropriate
means for acceptance. For example, your OS download procedure
could show the user a page that informs him or her that software
packages included in the download may contain software licenses to
which the user must agree before installation, and allow the user
to review them before download.
You can leverage your distribution's packaging technology to
ensure that the license terms have been accepted. For instance, on
Debian and derivative distributions, you could configure the
package so that if the debconf key for accepting the DLJ has not
been pre-accepted, the installation will be canceled if the
license cannot be presented. The point of presenting the license
is that an individual, corporation, non-profit or entity which
will be an end user of the JRE or JDK has had a chance to review
and agree to the DLJ. If the user or administrator pre-accepts
the key for DLJ agreement on behalf of herself or her group then
it is perfectly acceptable to silently install Sun Java on one or
many computers. This is an excellent example of how you can
leverage packaging infrastructure to comply with the terms of the
DLJ in ways that are convenient and expected for your users.
18. How do I redistribute the JDK in my OS, so that downstream
recipients are subject to the DLJ? Do I need to do anything
Nothing special - just be sure to include the license in your JDK
bundle, and inform your downstream recipients that the JDK is
subject to the license when they download or install it.
Technically, i wouldn't consider downloading and burning a live-cd an
But i think the license needs to be accepted before java is used.
Again, IANAL. This is just my interpretation of the license and the FAQ.
After all, it's plain ugly.. :-(
Full license text can be found at:
Pkg-grass-devel mailing list