Copyright info from these two files is missing:
libdrgn/arch_ppc64.c
libdrgn/kdump.c
On Fri, Aug 19, 2022 at 10:13:00AM +0200, Bastian Germann wrote:
> Am 19.08.22 um 03:41 schrieb Michel Alexandre Salim:
> > Quick question (applies to drgn, not libkdumpfile) - if the tarball
> > contains some m4 rules copied verbatim from autotools, do I have to list
> > them in d/copyright?
>
>
Am 19.08.22 um 03:41 schrieb Michel Alexandre Salim:
Quick question (applies to drgn, not libkdumpfile) - if the tarball
contains some m4 rules copied verbatim from autotools, do I have to list
them in d/copyright?
The answer is tricky: Per Debian Policy you have to include every license that
Le Sat, Feb 09, 2008 at 01:26:55PM -0500, Joey Hess a écrit :
Riku Voipio wrote:
I think the short term solution to this dilemma is to compile a list
of attributions needed to be included in advertizment material.
Also a list should be compiled attributions needed n documentation
(such as
On Thu, Feb 07, 2008 at 01:34:53PM +0900, Charles Plessy wrote:
I think that it is a bit frivolous to distribute software with
advertisment clause in main and not properly warning the redistributors,
I think the short term solution to this dilemma is to compile a list
of attributions needed to
Riku Voipio wrote:
I think the short term solution to this dilemma is to compile a list
of attributions needed to be included in advertizment material.
Also a list should be compiled attributions needed n documentation
(such as libjpeg's). Obviously most distributors/boob writers will
not
Charles Plessy [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Le Wed, Feb 06, 2008 at 10:27:55PM -0800, Russ Allbery a écrit :
Am I missing something?
This ?
http://web.archive.org/web/19990210065944/http://www.debian.org/misc/bsd.license
Hi,
I intend to package HPL benchmarks. Copyright file contains the
following statements:
--
1. Redistributions of source code must retain the above copyright
notice, this list of conditions and the following disclaimer.
On 06/02/2008, Jean Parpaillon wrote:
3. All advertising materials mentioning features or use of this
software must display the following acknowledgement:
This product includes software developed at the University of
Tennessee, Knoxville, Innovative Computing Laboratories.
Hi Jean!
You wrote:
I intend to package HPL benchmarks. Copyright file contains the
following statements:
--
1. Redistributions of source code must retain the above copyright
notice, this list of conditions and the following disclaimer.
This one time, at band camp, Cyril Brulebois said:
On 06/02/2008, Jean Parpaillon wrote:
3. All advertising materials mentioning features or use of this
software must display the following acknowledgement:
This product includes software developed at the University of
Hi,
Am Mittwoch, 6. Februar 2008 16:30 schrieb Jean Parpaillon:
Hi,
I intend to package HPL benchmarks. Copyright file contains the
following statements:
--
1. Redistributions of source code must retain the above copyright
notice, this list of conditions and the
On 06/02/2008, Sebastian Harl wrote:
Just to make this clear […]
Yep, thank you (all) for clarifying that, sorry for the inconvenience.
Cheers,
--
Cyril Brulebois
pgpyGch4L5nAE.pgp
Description: PGP signature
Hi,
On Wed, Feb 06, 2008 at 04:46:23PM +0100, Cyril Brulebois wrote:
On 06/02/2008, Jean Parpaillon wrote:
3. All advertising materials mentioning features or use of this
software must display the following acknowledgement:
This product includes software developed at the
On Wed, Feb 06, 2008 at 05:46:31PM +0100, Stefan Potyra wrote:
Hi,
Am Mittwoch, 6. Februar 2008 16:30 schrieb Jean Parpaillon:
Hi,
I intend to package HPL benchmarks. Copyright file contains the
following statements:
--
1. Redistributions of source code must
Le Wed, Feb 06, 2008 at 04:30:01PM +0100, Jean Parpaillon a écrit :
3. All advertising materials mentioning features or use of this
software must display the following acknowledgement:
This product
Charles Plessy [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
This example is maybe a bit artificial, but the point is that with such
licences in main, redistributors who use advertisement should in theory
read all the copyright files to check who to acknowledge. For this
reason, I wouldn't recommend to include
Le Wed, Feb 06, 2008 at 06:44:38PM -0800, Russ Allbery a écrit :
Charles Plessy [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
This example is maybe a bit artificial, but the point is that with such
licences in main, redistributors who use advertisement should in theory
read all the copyright files to check
Charles Plessy [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
I think that it is a bit frivolous to distribute software with
advertisment clause in main and not properly warning the redistributors,
who are the most likely persons to infringe the clause. We should
remeber that for other aspects of licencing and
Russ Allbery [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
I don't think it's horribly credible that including software covered
by the 4-clause BSD license in Debian violates the principle of
least surprise when we specifically list it as one of our acceptable
licenses in the DFSG.
The 4-clause BSD license is
Ben Finney [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
The 4-clause BSD license is not one that we list as an acceptable
license.
DFSG URL:http://www.debian.org/social_contract §10:
10. Example Licenses
The GPL, BSD, and Artistic licenses are examples of licenses that
we consider free.
Le Wed, Feb 06, 2008 at 10:27:55PM -0800, Russ Allbery a écrit :
Am I missing something?
This ?
http://web.archive.org/web/19990210065944/http://www.debian.org/misc/bsd.license
http://web.archive.org/web/20001205083200/http://www.debian.org/misc/bsd.license
--
Charles
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE,
hello!
I'm writing my first debian package and I've a question:
what copyright must I write in the copyright debian/copyright?
the package copyright or the software to be packaged copyright?
thanks!
--
David Arroyo Menéndez
http://www.davidam.com
David Arroyo [EMAIL PROTECTED] (04/11/2007):
the package copyright or the software to be packaged copyright?
The software (and its data/whatever)'s license in extenso (and all
additional copyright holders, license terms, etc.), and usually a
quick note about the packaging itself.
Cheers,
--
Hi Cyril,
* Cyril Brulebois [EMAIL PROTECTED] [2007-11-04 03:24]:
David Arroyo [EMAIL PROTECTED] (04/11/2007):
the package copyright or the software to be packaged copyright?
The software (and its data/whatever)'s license in extenso (and all
additional copyright holders, license terms,
Thanks!
2007/11/4, Nico Golde [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
Hi Cyril,
* Cyril Brulebois [EMAIL PROTECTED] [2007-11-04 03:24]:
David Arroyo [EMAIL PROTECTED] (04/11/2007):
the package copyright or the software to be packaged copyright?
The software (and its data/whatever)'s license in extenso
Hi. Thank you for your advice.
In article [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Richard Braakman [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Taketoshi Sano wrote:
I can't find no written permission of use, modify, distribute.
But there are many archives, including HP-UX sites and DEC VMS sites
which provides this xacursor
Hmmm, a fourth year student at u.waterloo in 1993 is probably somewhere
else long since then.
I'm not an official mentor (not even an official developer, yet), so
these are just my thoughts...
Maybe you can contact someone currently at u waterloo (the main web page
links to a long list of web
Taketoshi Sano wrote:
I can't find no written permission of use, modify, distribute.
But there are many archives, including HP-UX sites and DEC VMS sites
which provides this xacursor as a public domain. RedHat (RPM) package
for libc5 is also provided as contrib.
I wish to know whether I
On Tue, Jun 08, 1999 at 09:54:39PM +0900, Taketoshi Sano wrote:
snip
%%%
Redistribution and use with or without modification are permitted provided
that the following conditions are met:
1. One of the following (1-a,1-b,1-c)
1-a. Source distribution have all information in the
Taketoshi Sano proclaimed:
So, I proposed the author to change the license as following,
and He agrees to this change now.
%%%
Redistribution and use with or without modification are permitted provided
that the following conditions are met:
1. One of the following (1-a,1-b,1-c)
On Wed, Jun 09, 1999 at 09:09:51PM +0900, Taketoshi Sano wrote:
Hi. Thank you for your opinion.
In article [EMAIL PROTECTED]
James Mastros [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
clearly the intent of the author. He might be better served by simply going
GPL; he has most of the gist there already.
32 matches
Mail list logo
