Scripsit Steve Langasek > bug #368560 concerning what licenses the code is under. In the > sources of mesa 6.5 CVS (the version in experimental), I'm unable to > find any references to the "GLX Public License" at all. Does that > mean we should consider this particular license issue resolved, or > do either of you have evidence that the license statements included > upstream are incorrect?
No, I don't have such evidence. In fact I never knew in detail which code was covered by that licence - just noticed it in the copyright file and saw that it looked fishy. That was before the X.org transition, and it is entirely plausible that the offending files have been dropped/replaced/relicenced upstream or otherwise disappeared along the way. I have just grepped throught the mesa 6.4.2-1 sources for key phrases in the problematic license clauses, without finding any of them. So it seems that this bug does not apply to the current mesa packages, at least. -- Henning Makholm "What a hideous colour khaki is." -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
