[argyllcms] Re: Packaging aryllcms for distros, and licence incompatibilities

  • From: Roland Mas <lolando@xxxxxxxxxx>
  • To: argyllcms@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
  • Date: Thu, 12 Nov 2009 14:14:02 +0100

Richard Hughes, 2009-11-12 11:33:16 +0000 :

> I'm trying to package the latest RC1 for Fedora rawhide. With some
> background, Fedora is very strict on licensing.

Ha, Debian sneers at your so-called strictness! ;-)

> At the moment, different pieces of the source code have different
> licences, which is far from ideal. This is /okay/ for Fedora, but the
> way the licence changes have been done recently does not make it clear
> what files are under what licence, and also introduces some licence
> incompatibilities.
> For instance, there are now License.txt, License2.txt and License3.txt
> files in spectro/. Does this mean that all the files without licence
> headers have all three licences? Or no licence?

  My understanding is that it depends on the file.  A machine-parsable
interpretation of how each file is licensed is available at
(feel free to skip the first 600 lines, as they're a copy of AGPLv3).

> In one specific example, spec2cie.c is GPLv2 licensed. This is linked
> with libinsttypes which is created from libinsttypes.c which is
> licensed under AGPLv3. AGPLv3 is not compatible with GPLv2.

  Hmmm.  That is something I had overlooked.  Thanks for pointing that

> See http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Licensing for a easy to understand
> guide on what licence is compatible with each other. At the moment, I
> don't think I can (legally) build RC1 for Fedora. Please advise,
> thanks.

  Now I share the concerns :-)

Roland Mas

$ chown -R us:us your_base*

Other related posts: