Mailinglist Archive: opensuse-packaging (145 mails)

[Adrian Schröter <adrian@xxxxxxx>]

On Wednesday 25 July 2007 15:20:10 wrote Juergen Weigert:
> On Jul 25, 07 12:36:46 +0200, Reinhard Max wrote:
> > On Wed, 25 Jul 2007 at 12:00, Ludwig Nussel wrote:
> > > You wouldn't be able to install the package without breaking
> > > dependencies. That's annoying at least.
> >
> > Right, but that wouldn't matter from a legal point of view. If a
> > license requires us to include the license text with the binary
> > package, we might break the license no matter how hard we make it to
> > install the package without the license file being installed as well.
> >
> > GPLv2 says (section 1.) "[...] and give any other recipients of the
> > Program a copy of this License along with the Program." So, is setting
> > a symlink to a file and adding a dependency to the package enough to
> > fulfill the "along with the Program" requirement?
>
> Due to the symlink, the package has now one more dependency.
> It is simply an incomplete package, unless licenses.rpm is also installed.
> If the FSF insists on having a copy in each RPM, we can simply stop doing
> symlinks for GPL, and still have saved a tree with all the other licenses
> symlinked.

Can you ask the FSF please before we do it what their opinion about that is ?

-- 

Adrian Schroeter
SUSE LINUX Products GmbH, GF: Markus Rex, HRB 16746 (AG Nürnberg)
email: adrian@xxxxxxx

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-packaging+unsubscribe@xxxxxxxxxxxx
For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-packaging+help@xxxxxxxxxxxx