Re: [PATCH] gnu: Add xinetd.,Re: [PATCH] gnu: Add xinetd.

[Leo Famulari <leo@famulari.name>]

On Tue, Jan 31, 2017 at 08:49:16AM +0100, Thomas Danckaert wrote:
> From: Leo Famulari <leo@famulari.name>
> I've added a patch that fixes a file descriptor leak (and created a pull
> request for it).  There's also a patch to fix compilation on hurd, but
> that's probably something that should be fixed upstream?

We will find out :)

> The other patches are corrections to the man pages, which have made it into
> upstream master as well, so perhaps we do not need to add them all to Guix.

Agreed.

> From 7a10feac4ec4035214a8fc212344aacec83bedc6 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
> From: Thomas Danckaert <thomas.danckaert@gmail.com>
> Date: Thu, 26 Jan 2017 11:35:50 +0100
> Subject: [PATCH] gnu: Add xinetd.
> 
> * gnu/packages/web.scm (xinetd): New variable.
> * gnu/packages/patches/xinetd-CVE-2013-4342.patch: New file.
> * gnu/packages/patches/xinetd-fix-fd-leak.patch: New file.
> * gnu/local.mk (dist_patch_DATA): Add patches.

I pushed with the following changes.

I added more comments to the patch files. I think that patches should
include a link to upstream bug reports and upstream source, assuming
they exist.

> +    (license (l:non-copyleft "file://COPYRIGHT"))))

I changed the license to 'fsf-free', since the FSF does describe it as a
copyleft license:

https://www.gnu.org/licenses/license-list.en.html#xinetd

"This is a copyleft free software license, incompatible with the GPL.
It is incompatible because it places extra restrictions on
redistribution of modified versions that contradict the redistribution
requirements in the GPL."