Hi, All.
On Wed, May 11, 2011 at 16:50, robert robert.hegem...@gmx.de wrote:
Am 09.05.2011, 00:03 Uhr, schrieb bouvi...@mp3-tech.org:
It seems that it was actually a mistake. I've been confused by the
library vs lesser naming, and did not noticed then that lesser was
only the v2.1 name.
2011/5/11 Rogério Brito rbr...@ime.usp.br:
Hi, All.
On Wed, May 11, 2011 at 16:50, robert robert.hegem...@gmx.de wrote:
Am 09.05.2011, 00:03 Uhr, schrieb bouvi...@mp3-tech.org:
It seems that it was actually a mistake. I've been confused by the
library vs lesser naming, and did not noticed
Am 06.05.2011, 22:52 Uhr, schrieb Jonas Smedegaard d...@jones.dk:
There is either GNU Library General Public License version 2.0 or GNU
Lesser General Public License version 2.1.
It looks like Gabriel replaced 'Library' by 'Lesser' 3 years and 9 months
ago, I'm sure he had some reason for
Am 06.05.2011, 23:31 Uhr, schrieb Jonas Smedegaard d...@jones.dk:
On 11-05-06 at 04:55pm, Andres Mejia wrote:
On Fri, May 6, 2011 at 4:52 PM, Jonas Smedegaard d...@jones.dk wrote:
On 11-05-06 at 04:31pm, Andres Mejia wrote:
+This library is free software; you can redistribute it
Hello again,
Here's hopefully one more thing that should be fixed. It's an output
change from what's printed when using 'lame --license'. The patch is
attached which applies to the latest release of LAME (not CVS).
This is just a suggested change. LAME could still be redistributed
as-is I
On 11-05-06 at 04:31pm, Andres Mejia wrote:
+This library is free software; you can redistribute it and/or\n
+modify it under the terms of the GNU Lesser General Public\n
+License as published by the Free Software Foundation; either\n
+version 2
On Fri, May 6, 2011 at 4:52 PM, Jonas Smedegaard d...@jones.dk wrote:
On 11-05-06 at 04:31pm, Andres Mejia wrote:
+ This library is free software; you can redistribute it
and/or\n
+ modify it under the terms of the GNU Lesser General Public\n
+ License as
On 11-05-06 at 04:55pm, Andres Mejia wrote:
On Fri, May 6, 2011 at 4:52 PM, Jonas Smedegaard d...@jones.dk wrote:
On 11-05-06 at 04:31pm, Andres Mejia wrote:
+ This library is free software; you can redistribute it
and/or\n
+ modify it under the terms of the GNU
On Fri, May 6, 2011 at 5:31 PM, Jonas Smedegaard d...@jones.dk wrote:
On 11-05-06 at 04:55pm, Andres Mejia wrote:
On Fri, May 6, 2011 at 4:52 PM, Jonas Smedegaard d...@jones.dk wrote:
On 11-05-06 at 04:31pm, Andres Mejia wrote:
+ This library is free software; you can redistribute
Humm, apparently, something in the way ate your patch and I didn't receive
it.
On May 06 2011, Andres Mejia wrote:
On Fri, May 6, 2011 at 4:52 PM, Jonas Smedegaard d...@jones.dk wrote:
On 11-05-06 at 04:31pm, Andres Mejia wrote:
+ This library is free software; you can
On Friday 06 May 2011 5:50:59 pm Rogério Brito wrote:
Humm, apparently, something in the way ate your patch and I didn't receive
it.
Here it is again inline.
Description: Patch to simply print LGPL licence header when using lame --license
--- lame-3.98.4.orig/frontend/parse.c
+++
On 11-05-06 at 05:38pm, Andres Mejia wrote:
On Fri, May 6, 2011 at 5:31 PM, Jonas Smedegaard d...@jones.dk wrote:
LGPL2.0 == GNU Library General Public License version 2.0
LGPL2.0 != GNU Lesser General Public License version 2
You proposed the latter, which has 2 (two) flaws: a) Lesser
12 matches
Mail list logo
