From: Philip M. Gollucci pgollu...@p6m7g8.com
Date: Tue, 15 Jun 2010 02:03:08 +
On 06/15/10 00:46, Marco Bröder wrote:
I find it especially important to have a expression for 'version X or any
later version' (for example 'LGPLv2+'), since the following dummy example is
not adequate:
A
On Mon, 14 Jun 2010, Chuck Swiger wrote:
Where I live, someone without a legal degree cannot offer legal
advice
[..]
It might also not be a bad idea to not display anything about
licensing until a human enables some Makefile switch which acknowledges
the limitations of the system (ie, license
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 15/06/2010 07:46:27, Eric wrote:
It would seem from reading the various posting that the two missing features
are some sort of clean way of saying this license or higher and possibly
something along the lines of like this licence for cases where
On Tue, 2010-06-15 at 08:21 +0100, Matthew Seaman wrote:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 15/06/2010 07:46:27, Eric wrote:
It would seem from reading the various posting that the two missing features
are some sort of clean way of saying this license or higher and possibly
Evidently the Port: hplip-3.10.5_1 does not have a full time
maintainer. In any case, I have noticed this notation in the system log
when starting KDE:
Jun 15 10:24:37 scorpio python: hp-systray[3768]: error: option -s not
recognized
There does not appear to be any apparent problem though. Is
On Tue June 15 2010 04:03:08 Philip M. Gollucci wrote:
On 06/15/10 00:46, Marco Bröder wrote:
I find it especially important to have a expression for 'version X or any
later version' (for example 'LGPLv2+'), since the following dummy example
is
not adequate:
A very good idea, but not
On Tue June 15 2010 09:10:49 Janne Snabb wrote:
As a previous poster pointed out, I also think that the different
BSD licences should be separated.
Yes, they really are different licenses.
Who else should it know better than the FreeBSD Project (and NetBSD, OpenBSD,
DragonflyBSD, ...)? ;-)
On Tue, Jun 15, 2010 at 1:29 PM, Marco Bröder marco.broe...@gmx.eu wrote:
On Tue June 15 2010 09:10:49 Janne Snabb wrote:
As a previous poster pointed out, I also think that the different
BSD licences should be separated.
Yes, they really are different licenses.
The BSD license has evolved
On Tue, Jun 15, 2010 at 1:39 PM, Garrett Cooper yanef...@gmail.com wrote:
On Tue, Jun 15, 2010 at 1:29 PM, Marco Bröder marco.broe...@gmx.eu wrote:
On Tue June 15 2010 09:10:49 Janne Snabb wrote:
As a previous poster pointed out, I also think that the different
BSD licences should be
On Tue, Jun 15, 2010 at 02:46:27AM +0200, Marco Br??der wrote:
Hello,
I know the ports license framework is very new and not mature yet.
But it is not very useful in its current state, because several
popular licenses are missing and some license foo is not right /
specific enough to be
Currently the databases/php5-odbc PHP extension is hardcoded to be compiled
with unixODBC backend, so the users that have libiodbc installed (as a
dependency of kde4 ports, for ex.) can't installed the first 'cause those two
ODBC ports conflict with each other.
The php-odbc configure script
Hi,
There is a conflict between graphics/gd and devel/bazaar, cf.
http://www.freebsd.org/cgi/query-pr.cgi?pr=147418
Would it be acceptable to rename the bzr's annotate command into a
bzr-annotate command, as gd is older than bzr?
--
Sébastien Santoro aka Dereckson
Hi,
Ever since the addition of graphics/libjpeg-turbo, I had
been wondering how one could possibly build the whole ports tree
with it instead of graphics/jpeg. I wanted the choice.
Therefore, I wrote the attached bsd.jpeg.mk as a suggestion.
With it, we just add
OpenArena (maintainer timeout)
http://www.freebsd.org/cgi/query-pr.cgi?pr=ports/146818
wacom (approved patch by Alex Deiter)
http://www.freebsd.org/cgi/query-pr.cgi?pr=ports/146495
Should there be any reasons why this hasn't been committed yet,
I'd like to be told.
portlint makes a huge fuss
14 matches
Mail list logo
