On Mon, Jan 05, 2004 at 01:18:41PM -0800, David Brown wrote: > On Mon, Jan 05, 2004 at 04:05:49PM -0500, Jeremy Erwin wrote: > > > > b) the license states numerous times that modifications to the source > > code (including such modifications as required by the fink package) > > shall be clearly labeled as modifications, and that the version number > > should reflect the fact that it has been modified. > > The GPL requires that modifications be clearly stated. [...] > The GPL doesn't specify a version number change, however. > > Fink "distributes" its changes as patches, which automatically qualify > under this term (the patch itself is essentially a prominent notice of > which files, when, and what is changed). The only additional > requirement is the the version number reflect it as a non-standard > version. Perhaps n.n-fink-1 or something like that?
Wouldn't the fink package naming scheme (i.e., use of Revision) take care of that? I can't remember seeing a fink package handled as %n-%v (interacting with outside tarballs maybe, but not within the fink world's package manager code nor info files). But if we want to get paranoid, what about %r="fink-1"? dan -- Daniel Macks [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.netspace.org/~dmacks ------------------------------------------------------- This SF.net email is sponsored by: IBM Linux Tutorials. Become an expert in LINUX or just sharpen your skills. Sign up for IBM's Free Linux Tutorials. Learn everything from the bash shell to sys admin. Click now! http://ads.osdn.com/?ad_id=1278&alloc_id=3371&op=click _______________________________________________ Fink-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/fink-devel
