From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Andreas Enge Subject: Re: w3m: 'license'; error: redefinition of 'struct file_handle' Date: Wed, 13 Feb 2013 11:43:05 +0100 Message-ID: <201302131143.06301.andreas@enge.fr> References: <878v6spyx3.fsf@karetnikov.org> <87y5esk9s6.fsf@tines.lan> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="Boundary-01=_642GRg1z/uHuUz+" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([208.118.235.92]:42338) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1U5ZoA-0006bg-IN for bug-guix@gnu.org; Wed, 13 Feb 2013 05:43:29 -0500 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1U5Zo3-0005Zr-0c for bug-guix@gnu.org; Wed, 13 Feb 2013 05:43:22 -0500 Received: from moutng.kundenserver.de ([212.227.17.10]:52268) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1U5Zo2-0005Z7-O7 for bug-guix@gnu.org; Wed, 13 Feb 2013 05:43:14 -0500 In-Reply-To: <87y5esk9s6.fsf@tines.lan> List-Id: Bug reports for GNU Guix List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: bug-guix-bounces+gcggb-bug-guix=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Sender: bug-guix-bounces+gcggb-bug-guix=m.gmane.org@gnu.org To: bug-guix@gnu.org --Boundary-01=_642GRg1z/uHuUz+ Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Am Mittwoch, 13. Februar 2013 schrieb Mark H Weaver: > Anyway, in the case of w3m, there are quite a variety of licenses used: > http://packages.debian.org/changelogs/pool/main/w/w3m/w3m_0.5.3-8/w3m.c > opyright It looks like essentially, a w3m license is used, with a little bit of X11 interspersed for minor files. In this case, we usually put the main license into the corresponding package field with a guile comment concerning the other files. Even more so, the content (if not the wording) of this w3m license is essentially X11. So maybe we need a license x11-style, modelled on bsd- style? Additionally, the file matrix.c looks non-free to me: "3. No charge is made for this software or works derived from it. This clause shall not be construed as constraining other software distributed on the same medium as this software, nor is a distribution fee considered a charge." So maybe it needs to be patched out, if possible? How come debian contains the file? Andreas --Boundary-01=_642GRg1z/uHuUz+ Content-Type: text/html; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Am Mittwoch, 13. Februar 2013 schrieb Mark H Weaver:

> Anyway, in the case of w3m, there are quite a variety of licenses used:

> http://packages.debian.org/changelogs/pool/main/w/w3m/w3m_0.5.3-8/w3m.c

> opyright

 

It looks like essentially, a w3m license is used, with a little bit of X11 interspersed for minor files. In this case, we usually put the main license into the corresponding package field with a guile comment concerning the other files.

 

Even more so, the content (if not the wording) of this w3m license is essentially X11. So maybe we need a license x11-style, modelled on bsd-style?

 

Additionally, the file matrix.c looks non-free to me:

"3. No charge is made for this software or works derived from it.

This clause shall not be construed as constraining other software

distributed on the same medium as this software, nor is a

distribution fee considered a charge."

 

So maybe it needs to be patched out, if possible? How come debian contains the file?

 

Andreas

--Boundary-01=_642GRg1z/uHuUz+--