On Wed, Jun 12, 2013 at 10:38 PM, Flanagan, Elizabeth
elizabeth.flana...@intel.com wrote:
On Wed, Jun 12, 2013 at 1:06 PM, Hans Beckerus hans.becke...@gmail.com
wrote:
On 2013-06-12 7:55, Flanagan, Elizabeth wrote:
On Wed, Jun 12, 2013 at 6:05 AM, Hans Beckérus hans.becke...@gmail.com
In what way does LIC_FILES_CHKSUM correlate to what is specified in LICENSE?
LIC_FILES_CHKSUM *must* be specified unless LICENSE is set to CLOSED.
But, what if the package does not itself provide a license type file?
Is it then ok to simply leave LIC_FILES_CHKSUM = ?
Also, I could see that there
On Wed, Jun 12, 2013 at 6:05 AM, Hans Beckérus hans.becke...@gmail.com wrote:
In what way does LIC_FILES_CHKSUM correlate to what is specified in LICENSE?
LIC_FILES_CHKSUM *must* be specified unless LICENSE is set to CLOSED.
But, what if the package does not itself provide a license type file?
On 2013-06-12 7:55, Flanagan, Elizabeth wrote:
On Wed, Jun 12, 2013 at 6:05 AM, Hans Beckérus hans.becke...@gmail.com wrote:
In what way does LIC_FILES_CHKSUM correlate to what is specified in LICENSE?
LIC_FILES_CHKSUM *must* be specified unless LICENSE is set to CLOSED.
But, what if the
On Wed, Jun 12, 2013 at 1:06 PM, Hans Beckerus hans.becke...@gmail.com wrote:
On 2013-06-12 7:55, Flanagan, Elizabeth wrote:
On Wed, Jun 12, 2013 at 6:05 AM, Hans Beckérus hans.becke...@gmail.com
wrote:
In what way does LIC_FILES_CHKSUM correlate to what is specified in
LICENSE?
