From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: ludo@gnu.org (Ludovic =?UTF-8?Q?Court=C3=A8s?=) Subject: bug#32916: font-awesome v5 build scripts are not free Date: Wed, 03 Oct 2018 23:26:19 +0200 Message-ID: <87zhvuk9hg.fsf@gnu.org> References: <20181002191330.GA12909@jasmine.lan> <87ftxmltaf.fsf@netris.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Return-path: Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:48321) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1g7ofh-000593-Vy for bug-guix@gnu.org; Wed, 03 Oct 2018 17:27:06 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1g7ofh-00042b-1f for bug-guix@gnu.org; Wed, 03 Oct 2018 17:27:05 -0400 Received: from debbugs.gnu.org ([208.118.235.43]:60140) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.0:RSA_AES_128_CBC_SHA1:16) (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1g7ofe-00041Q-MD for bug-guix@gnu.org; Wed, 03 Oct 2018 17:27:04 -0400 Received: from Debian-debbugs by debbugs.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1g7ofe-0007TR-GW for bug-guix@gnu.org; Wed, 03 Oct 2018 17:27:02 -0400 Sender: "Debbugs-submit" Resent-Message-ID: In-Reply-To: <87ftxmltaf.fsf@netris.org> (Mark H. Weaver's message of "Wed, 03 Oct 2018 15:33:12 -0400") 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" To: Mark H Weaver Cc: 32916@debbugs.gnu.org Hello, Mark H Weaver skribis: > I agree that version 5 of font-awesome does not meet the requirements of > the FSDG, which states: > > A free system distribution should be self-hosting. This means that > you must be able to develop and build the system with tools that the > system provides you. As a result, a free system distribution cannot > include free software that can only be built by using nonfree > software. > > Moreover, it is doubtful that it could even be considered free software, > since it is not clear how users can effectively modify the font without > access to its build system, which is both proprietary and secret. > > FWIW, the GNU GPL v3 definition of "corresponding source" includes the > build system: > > The =E2=80=9CCorresponding Source=E2=80=9D for a work in object code fo= rm means all > the source code needed to generate, install, and (for an executable > work) run the object code and to modify the work, including scripts to > control those activities. I don=E2=80=99t have a clear opinion on =E2=80=98font-awesome=E2=80=99 yet,= but I have some comments: (1) only some of our font packages are built from source (though I think we should do more of that), (2) the font might be considered =E2=80=9Cnon-functional data=E2=80=9D rather than software under= the FSDG, and (3) the font is a =E2=80=9Cfree font=E2=80=9D under a license (SIL OFL)= that doesn=E2=80=99t have a clear notion of corresponding source like GPLv3 has. Ludo=E2=80=99.