Bug#931003: Bug#931003: Removed package(s) from unstable

2021-05-06 Thread Gerardo Ballabio
Thanks for your answer. That the Makefile, if present, should work is certainly a reasonable expectation, but as far as I can see, it isn't a license requirement. Note that the GPL also explicitly states that the program is provided without warranty of any kind (clause 11 in GPLv2, 15 in GPLv3),

Bug#931003: Bug#931003: Removed package(s) from unstable

2021-05-06 Thread Santiago Vila
On Thu, May 06, 2021 at 09:50:43AM +0200, Gerardo Ballabio wrote: > Santiago Vila wrote: > > Among those packages there is even a GPL violation in gcc-8-cross, > as the FTBFS problem happens because the Makefile is buggy (the GPL > says packages must be distributed with a working Makefile). > > I

Bug#931003: Bug#931003: Removed package(s) from unstable

2021-05-06 Thread Gerardo Ballabio
Santiago Vila wrote: > Among those packages there is even a GPL violation in gcc-8-cross, as the FTBFS problem happens because the Makefile is buggy (the GPL says packages must be distributed with a working Makefile). I was very surprised to read that. I just reread the GPL and could not find

Bug#931003: Bug#931003: Removed package(s) from unstable

2021-05-04 Thread Santiago Vila
On Tue, May 04, 2021 at 11:48:09AM +0100, peter green wrote: > > This was automatically closed by ftpmaster because the package was > > removed from unstable, but this still does not fix the FTBFS problem > > in stable. > > Unfortunately I don't think a proper fix will be forthcoming, upstream >

Bug#931003: Bug#931003: Removed package(s) from unstable

2021-05-04 Thread peter green
This was automatically closed by ftpmaster because the package was removed from unstable, but this still does not fix the FTBFS problem in stable. Unfortunately I don't think a proper fix will be forthcoming, upstream has abandoned the crate in question. Afaict the only purpose this package