Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=506339 --- Comment #24 from Bill Nottingham <nott...@redhat.com> 2009-07-17 11:38:59 EDT --- (In reply to comment #23) > I looked over the licensing and have a question. The code that I believe you > currently indicate is LGPLv2+ is public domain unless the getopt_long code is > used. But there shouldn't be any reason for that to be compiled or linked in, > because glibc should already have it. Indeed, the build log shows no trace of > that code being used. So why isn't the bulk of the package public domain? > (Obviously the various scripts that are GPLv2+ and are correctly marked as > such.) The COPYING file in the tarball is incorrect/premature (see comment #13); the code for the xz commands (src/xz/*.c) is marked as LGPLv2.1+ in its comments. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. _______________________________________________ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
