Bug#836844: eigen3: autopkgtests fail on ppc64el
On Sun, 13 Nov 2016 18:04:28 +0200 Graham Inggswrote: > Control: reopen -1 > > I've just checked eigen3 3.3.0-1 on plummer.debian.org, and it still outputs > > forceMatrix*axisMatrix: -1 0 0 > 0 -2 0 > 0 0 -3 > > I have checked with current dev. tree and problem remains I have tried compiler g++-4.9 and g++-5 and g++-6 and all are providing same error on ppc64le On x86_64 using g++-5 there is no error. -- debian-science-maintainers mailing list debian-science-maintainers@lists.alioth.debian.org http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/debian-science-maintainers
Re: r-cran-spdep_0.6-4-1_amd64.changes REJECTED
I've now spent three hours complying, IMHO far more than was sensible. The questioned code is gone, despite my not agreeing with your complaints, nor seeing that you were willing to contribute a replacement. Check out spdep from R-Forge, and reply rapidly confirming that no further changes are needed. Roger On Mon, 30 May 2016, Andreas Tille wrote: Hi Roger, On Mon, May 30, 2016 at 05:51:57PM +0200, Roger Bivand wrote: Please tell them that I am not willing to make any further changes. If they bothered to look, they would have seen that the functions are not simply copied from arm.c, but modified to use double rather than integer coordinates. I can add arm.c for documentation and change the soigraph.c function names to show that they are modified from those in arm.c, but I do not see the point. I think the point is pretty clear: Its no question that you changed something but if you have permission to change the existing files is the basic question. To quote again: This book is in copyright. (...) no reproduction of any part may take place without the written permission of Cambridge University Press. So did you got the written permission of Cambridge University Press? If yes, could you please attach a copy of this permission to the code. Kind regards Andreas. Best wishes, Roger On Mon, 30 May 2016, Andreas Tille wrote: Hi again Roger, this is just a ping in case you might have missed my last mail about the licensing of the file copied from "Computational Geometry in C". Were you able to clarify the issue or to rewrite the code in question? Thanks for your cooperation Andreas. On Fri, May 13, 2016 at 05:26:09PM +0200, Andreas Tille wrote: Hi Roger, I'm afraid I need to come back to you again about the licensing of the file in question in the spdep package. Please read below what the Debian ftpmasters think about the license: On Fri, May 13, 2016 at 01:00:23PM +, Thorsten Alteholz wrote: Hi Andreas, ok, one step further, but two questions remain: - "... in its entirety ...", not being a native speaker, but for me that sounds like you are only allowed to distribute the whole example code and are not allowed to use just parts of it - anyway, the main point is that you are only allowed to redistribute the code but have no permission to modify it, which is against DFSG 3. Thorsten I'm sorry that this is such a longish process bit it would be really cool if you could have another look or try to contact the authors (or rewrite this code? - I think in some previous conversation you wrote about this option as well). Kind regards and thanks for your cooperation Andreas. -- http://fam-tille.de -- Roger Bivand Department of Economics, Norwegian School of Economics, Helleveien 30, N-5045 Bergen, Norway. voice: +47 55 95 93 55; fax +47 55 95 91 00 e-mail: roger.biv...@nhh.no http://orcid.org/-0003-2392-6140 https://scholar.google.no/citations?user=AWeghB0J=en http://depsy.org/person/434412 -- debian-science-maintainers mailing list debian-science-maintainers@lists.alioth.debian.org http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/debian-science-maintainers -- Roger Bivand Department of Economics, Norwegian School of Economics, Helleveien 30, N-5045 Bergen, Norway. voice: +47 55 95 93 55; fax +47 55 95 91 00 e-mail: roger.biv...@nhh.no http://orcid.org/-0003-2392-6140 https://scholar.google.no/citations?user=AWeghB0J=en http://depsy.org/person/434412 -- debian-science-maintainers mailing list debian-science-maintainers@lists.alioth.debian.org http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/debian-science-maintainers
Re: r-cran-spdep_0.6-4-1_amd64.changes REJECTED
Hi Andreas, Please tell them that I am not willing to make any further changes. If they bothered to look, they would have seen that the functions are not simply copied from arm.c, but modified to use double rather than integer coordinates. I can add arm.c for documentation and change the soigraph.c function names to show that they are modified from those in arm.c, but I do not see the point. Best wishes, Roger On Mon, 30 May 2016, Andreas Tille wrote: Hi again Roger, this is just a ping in case you might have missed my last mail about the licensing of the file copied from "Computational Geometry in C". Were you able to clarify the issue or to rewrite the code in question? Thanks for your cooperation Andreas. On Fri, May 13, 2016 at 05:26:09PM +0200, Andreas Tille wrote: Hi Roger, I'm afraid I need to come back to you again about the licensing of the file in question in the spdep package. Please read below what the Debian ftpmasters think about the license: On Fri, May 13, 2016 at 01:00:23PM +, Thorsten Alteholz wrote: Hi Andreas, ok, one step further, but two questions remain: - "... in its entirety ...", not being a native speaker, but for me that sounds like you are only allowed to distribute the whole example code and are not allowed to use just parts of it - anyway, the main point is that you are only allowed to redistribute the code but have no permission to modify it, which is against DFSG 3. Thorsten I'm sorry that this is such a longish process bit it would be really cool if you could have another look or try to contact the authors (or rewrite this code? - I think in some previous conversation you wrote about this option as well). Kind regards and thanks for your cooperation Andreas. -- http://fam-tille.de -- Roger Bivand Department of Economics, Norwegian School of Economics, Helleveien 30, N-5045 Bergen, Norway. voice: +47 55 95 93 55; fax +47 55 95 91 00 e-mail: roger.biv...@nhh.no http://orcid.org/-0003-2392-6140 https://scholar.google.no/citations?user=AWeghB0J=en http://depsy.org/person/434412 -- debian-science-maintainers mailing list debian-science-maintainers@lists.alioth.debian.org http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/debian-science-maintainers
Re: Comments regarding r-cran-spdep_0.5-92-1_amd64.changes
Hi Andreas, I have added: /* This code is described in "Computational Geometry in C" (Second Edition), Chapter 8. It is not written to be comprehensible without the explanation in that book. Prints out one arm configuration to reach given target. Assumes number of links >= 3. Input: nlinks Number of links L1 L2 ... Ln Link lengths x0 y0target0 x1 x2target1 ... Written by Joseph O'Rourke. Last modified: December 1997 Questions to orou...@cs.smith.edu. This code is Copyright 1998 by Joseph O'Rourke. It may be freely redistributed in its entirety provided that this copyright notice is not removed. */ to spdep/src/soigraph.c (committed to R-forge, will be released when the next release occurs). This is the comment at the top of arm.c from: http://cs.smith.edu/~orourke/CGCode/SecondEdition/Ccode2.tar.gz which is the author's code distribution site, and is more relevant than the printed text of the book. We've used the same approach in sp/src/pip.c for over ten years without attracting Debian's ire. Nicholas and I understood in 2001 that ... may be freely redistributed ... could reasonably be taken as permission to include and redistribute these small functions. Do you want me to revisit the separate packaging of data sets? Best wishes, Roger On Mon, 4 Apr 2016, Andreas Tille wrote: Hi Roger, I hope you remember the discussion we had two years ago when I tried to package spdep for Debian as a dependency to test some R epipdemiology tools. I somehow gave up since the packages can be run with out spdep. However, we have now some bioinformatics tools that have a strong dependency and so we need to dive into this again. As you can read below the Debian ftpmaster has reviewed the source code of spdep and found a weak part in the licensing. If you ask me this issue is also relevant for distributing spdep code on CRAN but nobody has stumbled upon this before. It would be great if you could clarify the license of these pieces of code or replace it by some alternative free code. Kind regards and thanks for your support Andreas. On Sun, Apr 03, 2016 at 04:49:37PM +, Thorsten Alteholz wrote: Hi Andreas, the issues about src/soigraph.c are not really solved. According to the file: * The subroutines TwoCirclesxx and SubVec are adapted for R and Double * precision coordinates by Nicholas Lewin-Koh, from Computational * Geometry in C, Joseph O'Rourke, Cambridge University Press * (1998), specifically from arm/arm.c. Copyright for those subroutines * remains his. As you can see, for example on Amazon, this book contains a paragraph: This book is in copyright. (...) no reproduction of any part may take place without the written permission of Cambridge University Press. From my point of view this does not look like that "This code may be freely redistributed" ... Thorsten -- debian-science-maintainers mailing list debian-science-maintainers@lists.alioth.debian.org http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/debian-science-maintainers -- Roger Bivand Department of Economics, Norwegian School of Economics, Helleveien 30, N-5045 Bergen, Norway. voice: +47 55 95 93 55; fax +47 55 95 91 00 e-mail: roger.biv...@nhh.no http://orcid.org/-0003-2392-6140 https://scholar.google.no/citations?user=AWeghB0J=en http://depsy.org/person/434412 -- debian-science-maintainers mailing list debian-science-maintainers@lists.alioth.debian.org http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/debian-science-maintainers
Re: Comments from ftpmaster regarding spdep Debian package
On Thu, 31 Jul 2014, Andreas Tille wrote: Hi Roger, On Thu, Jul 31, 2014 at 06:42:06PM +0200, Roger Bivand wrote: Hi Andreas, Given surveillance rather than my (wrong) guess, I'm willing to do what I can - I agree that actual use in epidemiology is worth facilitating. Should the soigraph issue prove problematic, I'll look at a work-around. I'll wait for ftpmaster's response and let you know: OK What is the r-cran-maptools issue - I'm also the maintainer of that package? I'm not aware of what might be non-free there; maybe the data files for examples and testing? Nobody has asked me about that. To explain this I need to come back to the debian/copyright file. Here is the debian/copyright file http://anonscm.debian.org/viewvc/debian-science/packages/R/r-cran-maptools/trunk/debian/copyright?view=diffr1=45900r2=46749diff_format=h The files on the right side under the tag Files-Excluded do not have any licensing information. I have asked years ago (Spring 2009) but did not got any answer. For me (and the users of surveillance the removal of these files is perfectly OK. So in principle I see no stromg reason to keep the files if it creates a lot of work for you. The purpose of all the packages I maintain is teaching at graduate levels, and all the examples (so the data sets) are included in the packages to permit users to reproduce text book results. This software is not an application, it is intended to permit learning, first by doing what text books say, then learning from own data. This is my ontology. Consequently, the licensing/copyright of the code and its documentation is orthogonal to that of the data sets. Note that spdep has far more data than maptools, but this has not been questioned. If the data license issues in spdep are not a problem, why were they a problem in maptools? Is GPL a relevant license for data sets (rhetorical question)? The examples on the help pages all need access to data sets - the data sets chosen by me are those that are most relevant for relating the methods to text books in which they are discussed. One (bad/ugly) resolution is to create a separate data set package. However, this is a general problem because most CRAN packages face the same problem. By the way, I maintain maptools, and cannot recall being contacted in 2009. Nicholas contributed code in 2000/2001, but now has nothing to do with maptools. Best wishes, Roger Kind regards Andreas. -- Roger Bivand Department of Economics, Norwegian School of Economics, Helleveien 30, N-5045 Bergen, Norway. voice: +47 55 95 93 55; fax +47 55 95 91 00 e-mail: roger.biv...@nhh.no -- debian-science-maintainers mailing list debian-science-maintainers@lists.alioth.debian.org http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/debian-science-maintainers
Re: Comments from ftpmaster regarding spdep Debian package
On Wed, 30 Jul 2014, Andreas Tille wrote: Hi Roger, On Wed, Jul 30, 2014 at 09:36:22PM +0200, Roger Bivand wrote: Hi Andreas, This isn't a patch to my spdep/inst/README file. No, it's not! :-) I have no knowledge of any debian/copyright file, and cannot take responsibility for that This was never intended - it was just for our ftpmasters because its their responsibility to verify the copyright + license of each file we want to upload. Sorry if this was confusing. (I don't think installing from source is a problem for non-OSX/Windows users; I do not use Debian systems, and do not know anything about their packaging systems other than very bad experiences with people with messed up GIS packages). If you want me to patch anything, diff from spdep/inst/README on R-forge. In particular: Copyright: 2005 Yongwan Chun, Michael Tiefelsdorf and Roger Bivand License: GPL-2+ looks very wrong. Well, the line above this was Files: R/SpatialFiltering.R in front of the Copyright/License paragraph. We need to list all explicite Copyright statement inside the code. I can not see in how far this should be in conflict with your spdep/DESCRIPTION file. Please understand that the by-file copyrights are not important in R packages that I have written and maintain. The DESCRIPTION file is the root definition. I'm not prepared to check every file in spdep (or other packages) for copyright definitions, as for R purposes these are covered globally. If Debian need to list all explicit Copyright statement inside the code, that is a policy choice that is non-conformant with R packaging practice. The dates are almost all wrong, and the names are often wrong. There are more details in the ChangeLog, but even they are not consistent. Often changes are made based on user wishes on our mailing list without clear attribution by person (idea by NN, code changes by me). Sometimes there are comments, but not always. R/SpatialFiltering.R was written by Chun, Tiefelsdorf and myself, and has been modified by me since 2005. The list of contributors is in spdep/DESCRIPTION in R standard parsable form; +Files: R/bptest.sarlm.R +Copyright: 1998 Joseph O'Rourke orou...@cs.smith.edu isn't the correct file - should be src/soigraph.c. Uhhmmm, perhaps I misinterpretet your first answer. We have to troublesome files. Would you please consider reading the original mail here: No. http://lists.alioth.debian.org/pipermail/debian-science-maintainers/2014-July/026470.html I'd be grateful if you'd run any (unneeded) copyright file by me before proceeding. I hope not to do any unneeded work. The Debian copyright file is required for any Debian package and you can have a look here: http://anonscm.debian.org/viewvc/debian-science/packages/R/r-cran-spdep/trunk/debian/copyright?view=markup I'd be more than happy if you could clarify the open issues for the two files src/soigraph.c This is the problematic file which I covered in my earlier reply. R/bptest.sarlm.R The code is from a GPL 2 | 3 R package (when copied only GPL2, subsequently 2 | 3 (but not 2+, either 2 or 3, not any beyond 3 if they ever emerge). in a format like this. No way. The Debian formats are no help to me in what I do. If you need that format, you should create it. If such a file is needed, it should only point to the correct file within the R package (otherwise they will get out of sync). Since we are packaging more than R packages in Debian we can not drop this general requirement and we need to stick to the given format. I agree that keeping these files in sync is a bit troublesome but I have no choice but providing such a file (which works for 500 R packages in Debian). As you can see, the decision of a master is of very little use s/master/ftpmaster/ = the gate keeper of the Debian package pool. to me, I'll humour your attempts if you do things right, but have no need to see spdep distributed in this way - Debian users should IMO always install R packages from source to avoid unintended incompatibilities. The rationale why I intend to package spdep is that we have a certain set of R packages packaged for Debian for very good reasons and now it turned out that spdep is used as a new dependency to run a test suite of some other packages. So this is a dependency problem generated by some other R package that imports from or depends on spdep? That is, spatial data analysis is tangential to your needs? That makes me even less inclined to help. Which package? My guess is stargazer, so the easy solution is to tell stargazer to de-list spdep (the model output from models fitted in spdep is totally misunderstood and mangled by stargazer omitting the spatial coefficoents - I told the stargazer maintainer about this long ago, and asked him to fix it, which he didn't). Unless you explain why I should spend any more time on this, it isn't going anywhere, and you are wasting time on spdep. I
Re: Comments from ftpmaster regarding spdep Debian package
On Thu, 31 Jul 2014, Andreas Tille wrote: Hi Roger, I'm very astonished that this thread which started with two very simple questions exagerated to such a time consuming discussion. Most questions are not as simple as they appear, think ontologies. Mine differs from yours. You haven't toød me why you need to package spdep other than that another R package depends on (enhances?) spdep. I guessed stargazer, but you ignored my question. I need to know why this matters. Since I read a lot of frustration in you mail and no chance to clarify things easily I just repeat the main point: inst/README says: A frequently given reply for Debian/Ubuntu users of rgdal (R interface to GDAL) is to avoid any and all pre-packaged Debian/Ubuntu packages and similar dependency traps. The Debian/Ubuntu packaging of central GIS software is so poor and tardy that it is a major problem for users. Consequently I view any such packaging as unnecessary in principle and practice, and that users should install from source on Linux/Unix, especially CRAN packages and R itself, and crucial external dependencies. File: src/soigraph.c is copyright (c) 2001 by Nicholas Lewin-Koh and is subject to the licence at the foot of this file, but also contains subroutines TwoCirclesxx and SubVec, which are adapted for R and Double precision coordinates by Nicholas Lewin-Koh, from Computational Geometry in C, Joseph O.Rourke, Cambridge University Press (1998). Copyright for those subroutines remains his. Can you please confirm that the license is really GPLv2+? [ ] yes [ ] no No idea, IANAL, I assume that the original author Nicholas Lewin-Koh checked in 2001 when the code came into being that the license given was adequate. My interpretation of the text in the file from which the functions were taken is that it permits use and redistribution provided that the copyright to J. O'Rourke is acknowledged, which it is. Best wishes, Roger Sorry for the obviously failed attempt to explain what we would like to know from you. Kind regards Andreas. -- Roger Bivand Department of Economics, Norwegian School of Economics, Helleveien 30, N-5045 Bergen, Norway. voice: +47 55 95 93 55; fax +47 55 95 91 00 e-mail: roger.biv...@nhh.no -- debian-science-maintainers mailing list debian-science-maintainers@lists.alioth.debian.org http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/debian-science-maintainers
Re: Comments from ftpmaster regarding spdep Debian package
Hi Andreas, Given surveillance rather than my (wrong) guess, I'm willing to do what I can - I agree that actual use in epidemiology is worth facilitating. Should the soigraph issue prove problematic, I'll look at a work-around. What is the r-cran-maptools issue - I'm also the maintainer of that package? I'm not aware of what might be non-free there; maybe the data files for examples and testing? Nobody has asked me about that. Best wishes, Roger On Thu, 31 Jul 2014, Andreas Tille wrote: Hi Roger, On Thu, Jul 31, 2014 at 03:47:34PM +0200, Roger Bivand wrote: I'm very astonished that this thread which started with two very simple questions exagerated to such a time consuming discussion. Most questions are not as simple as they appear, think ontologies. Mine differs from yours. You haven't toød me why you need to package spdep other than that another R package depends on (enhances?) spdep. http://surveillance.r-forge.r-project.org I guessed stargazer, but you ignored my question. I need to know why this matters. I have no idea why you guessed this since stargazer is not packaged for Debian and I do not know about any intend to package it. I did not wanted to avoid your question but rather wanted to save your time with discussion that seemed irrelevant to me. Since I read a lot of frustration in you mail and no chance to clarify things easily I just repeat the main point: inst/README says: A frequently given reply for Debian/Ubuntu users of rgdal (R interface to GDAL) is to avoid any and all pre-packaged Debian/Ubuntu packages and similar dependency traps. The Debian/Ubuntu packaging of central GIS software is so poor and tardy that it is a major problem for users. Since I can not find rgdal in the Debian package pool I would welcome if this accusation would go to the place where it belongs to. While I agree that Debian GIS software -- not GIS software written in R but in general -- was not in the best state but there is currently an effort to enhance situation. It does not help if people repeat third persons experiences without checking the current status. Consequently I view any such packaging as unnecessary in principle and practice, and that users should install from source on Linux/Unix, especially CRAN packages and R itself, and crucial external dependencies. I'm working in the Debian Med project and the epidemiology task has several R packages: http://blends.debian.org/med/tasks/epi The packages there do not have any open bug reports and are up to date with the exception of r-cran-surveillance which I'm working on currently. It needs to pass the new queue for the sake of waiting for a r-cran-maptools. Since I added auto testing feature for all packages featuring unit tests also spdep is needed since it is used in the unit tests. You seem to be concerned about the quality of packaged software and so I hope you agree that running a test suite automatically and periodically is a good idea. In short: I accept your opinion about Debian packaging but there are users out there who are regarding our effort as helpful and I'm doing this for these people. File: src/soigraph.c is copyright (c) 2001 by Nicholas Lewin-Koh and is subject to the licence at the foot of this file, but also contains subroutines TwoCirclesxx and SubVec, which are adapted for R and Double precision coordinates by Nicholas Lewin-Koh, from Computational Geometry in C, Joseph O.Rourke, Cambridge University Press (1998). Copyright for those subroutines remains his. Can you please confirm that the license is really GPLv2+? [ ] yes [ ] no No idea, IANAL, I assume that the original author Nicholas Lewin-Koh checked in 2001 when the code came into being that the license given was adequate. My interpretation of the text in the file from which the functions were taken is that it permits use and redistribution provided that the copyright to J. O'Rourke is acknowledged, which it is. I'll forward this to our ftpmaster whether he might regard this as sufficient to distribute the package. Kind regards Andreas. -- Roger Bivand Department of Economics, Norwegian School of Economics, Helleveien 30, N-5045 Bergen, Norway. voice: +47 55 95 93 55; fax +47 55 95 91 00 e-mail: roger.biv...@nhh.no -- debian-science-maintainers mailing list debian-science-maintainers@lists.alioth.debian.org http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/debian-science-maintainers
Re: Comments from ftpmaster regarding spdep Debian package
Hi Andreas, On Wed, 30 Jul 2014, Andreas Tille wrote: Hi Roger, I tried to package spdep for Debian on behalf of the Debian Science team. The Debian ftpmaster had some issues before he will accept the package. Could you please clarify the points below. Thanks a lot and also thanks for providing spdep as free software Andreas. - Forwarded message from Thorsten Alteholz ftpmas...@ftp-master.debian.org - Date: Wed, 30 Jul 2014 11:51:55 + From: Thorsten Alteholz ftpmas...@ftp-master.debian.org To: Debian Science Team debian-science-maintainers@lists.alioth.debian.org, Andreas Tille ti...@debian.org Cc: Debian FTP Masters ftpmas...@ftp-master.debian.org Subject: Comments regarding r-cran-spdep_0.5-74-1_amd64.changes Hi Andreas, according to spdep/inst/README parts of src/soigraph.c are taken from a publication of Camebridge University Press. Can you please confirm that the license is really GPLv2+? The code at: http://cs.smith.edu/~orourke/books/ftp.html http://cs.smith.edu/~orourke/CGCode/SecondEdition/Ccode2.tar.gz includes arm/arm.c with the affected functions. This file has: /* This code is described in Computational Geometry in C (Second Edition), Chapter 8. It is not written to be comprehensible without the explanation in that book. Prints out one arm configuration to reach given target. Assumes number of links = 3. Input: nlinks Number of links L1 L2 ... Ln Link lengths x0 y0target0 x1 x2target1 ... Written by Joseph O'Rourke. Last modified: December 1997 Questions to orou...@cs.smith.edu. This code is Copyright 1998 by Joseph O'Rourke. It may be freely redistributed in its entirety provided that this copyright notice is not removed. */ The file src/soigraph.c has: /* Copyright 2001 by Nicholas Lewin-Koh. * NOTE * The subroutines TwoCirclesxx and SubVec are adapted for R and Double * precision coordinates by Nicholas Lewin-Koh, from Computational * Geometry in C, Joseph O'Rourke, Cambridge University Press * (1998). Copyright for those subroutines remains his. / (slightly edited on R-forge to cite the arm/arm.c file) which we would argue meets the requirements of the copyright holder. If you disagree, it may be possible to reproduce the functionality using another R package. spdep/R/bptest.sarlm.R seems to be just GPLv2 and not GPLv2+, doesn't it? From: http://cran.r-project.org/web/packages/lmtest/index.html lmtest now is GPL-2 | GPL-3; R source file in spdep updated. Hope this helps, Roger Thorsten -- Roger Bivand Department of Economics, Norwegian School of Economics, Helleveien 30, N-5045 Bergen, Norway. voice: +47 55 95 93 55; fax +47 55 95 91 00 e-mail: roger.biv...@nhh.no -- debian-science-maintainers mailing list debian-science-maintainers@lists.alioth.debian.org http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/debian-science-maintainers
Re: Comments from ftpmaster regarding spdep Debian package
Hi Andreas, This isn't a patch to my spdep/inst/README file. I have no knowledge of any debian/copyright file, and cannot take responsibility for that (I don't think installing from source is a problem for non-OSX/Windows users; I do not use Debian systems, and do not know anything about their packaging systems other than very bad experiences with people with messed up GIS packages). If you want me to patch anything, diff from spdep/inst/README on R-forge. In particular: Copyright: 2005 Yongwan Chun, Michael Tiefelsdorf and Roger Bivand License: GPL-2+ looks very wrong. The list of contributors is in spdep/DESCRIPTION in R standard parsable form; +Files: R/bptest.sarlm.R +Copyright: 1998 Joseph O'Rourke orou...@cs.smith.edu isn't the correct file - should be src/soigraph.c. I'd be grateful if you'd run any (unneeded) copyright file by me before proceeding. If such a file is needed, it should only point to the correct file within the R package (otherwise they will get out of sync). As you can see, the decision of a master is of very little use to me, I'll humour your attempts if you do things right, but have no need to see spdep distributed in this way - Debian users should IMO always install R packages from source to avoid unintended incompatibilities. Best wishes, Roger On Wed, 30 Jul 2014, Andreas Tille wrote: Hi Roger, thanks for your very fast response. I keep our ftpmaster in CC since he finally needs to decide. I attached a proposed diff for the debian/copyright file. On Wed, Jul 30, 2014 at 05:12:58PM +0200, Roger Bivand wrote: Hi Andreas, On Wed, 30 Jul 2014, Andreas Tille wrote: Hi Roger, I tried to package spdep for Debian on behalf of the Debian Science team. The Debian ftpmaster had some issues before he will accept the package. Could you please clarify the points below. Thanks a lot and also thanks for providing spdep as free software Andreas. - Forwarded message from Thorsten Alteholz ftpmas...@ftp-master.debian.org - Date: Wed, 30 Jul 2014 11:51:55 + From: Thorsten Alteholz ftpmas...@ftp-master.debian.org To: Debian Science Team debian-science-maintainers@lists.alioth.debian.org, Andreas Tille ti...@debian.org Cc: Debian FTP Masters ftpmas...@ftp-master.debian.org Subject: Comments regarding r-cran-spdep_0.5-74-1_amd64.changes Hi Andreas, according to spdep/inst/README parts of src/soigraph.c are taken from a publication of Camebridge University Press. Can you please confirm that the license is really GPLv2+? The code at: http://cs.smith.edu/~orourke/books/ftp.html http://cs.smith.edu/~orourke/CGCode/SecondEdition/Ccode2.tar.gz includes arm/arm.c with the affected functions. This file has: /* This code is described in Computational Geometry in C (Second Edition), Chapter 8. It is not written to be comprehensible without the explanation in that book. Prints out one arm configuration to reach given target. Assumes number of links = 3. Input: nlinks Number of links L1 L2 ... Ln Link lengths x0 y0target0 x1 x2target1 ... Written by Joseph O'Rourke. Last modified: December 1997 Questions to orou...@cs.smith.edu. This code is Copyright 1998 by Joseph O'Rourke. It may be freely redistributed in its entirety provided that this copyright notice is not removed. */ I think this is fine so far. The file src/soigraph.c has: /* Copyright 2001 by Nicholas Lewin-Koh. * NOTE * The subroutines TwoCirclesxx and SubVec are adapted for R and Double * precision coordinates by Nicholas Lewin-Koh, from Computational * Geometry in C, Joseph O'Rourke, Cambridge University Press * (1998). Copyright for those subroutines remains his. / (slightly edited on R-forge to cite the arm/arm.c file) which we would argue meets the requirements of the copyright holder. If you disagree, it may be possible to reproduce the functionality using another R package. I'm not sure about this but id definitely does not sound like GPLv? For me this statement does not include any license statement at all. Thorsten, what do you think? spdep/R/bptest.sarlm.R seems to be just GPLv2 and not GPLv2+, doesn't it? From: http://cran.r-project.org/web/packages/lmtest/index.html lmtest now is GPL-2 | GPL-3; R source file in spdep updated. Hope this helps, Yes, it does to discuss things further. Thanks a lot Andreas. -- Roger Bivand Department of Economics, Norwegian School of Economics, Helleveien 30, N-5045 Bergen, Norway. voice: +47 55 95 93 55; fax +47 55 95 91 00 e-mail: roger.biv...@nhh.no -- debian-science-maintainers mailing list debian-science-maintainers@lists.alioth.debian.org http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/debian-science-maintainers