From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Dave Love Subject: Re: Question about multiple licenses Date: Thu, 07 Sep 2017 17:20:09 +0100 Message-ID: <874lseqy4m.fsf@albion.it.manchester.ac.uk> References: <681c721c.AEQAPExWoDUAAAAAAAAAAAOtZhgAAAACwQwAAAAAAAW9WABZoSX-@mailjet.com> <87mv6kj7i7.fsf@gmail.com> <873786zlsb.fsf@albion.it.manchester.ac.uk> <87h8wiy0ic.fsf@gnu.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]:46969) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1dpzXM-0006a8-LP for guix-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 07 Sep 2017 12:20:24 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1dpzXH-0006Cu-T2 for guix-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 07 Sep 2017 12:20:16 -0400 In-Reply-To: <87h8wiy0ic.fsf@gnu.org> ("Ludovic \=\?iso-8859-1\?Q\?Court\=E8s\?\= \=\?iso-8859-1\?Q\?\=22's\?\= message of "Mon, 4 Sep 2017 16:57:47 +0200") List-Id: "Development of GNU Guix and the GNU System distribution." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: guix-devel-bounces+gcggd-guix-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Sender: "Guix-devel" To: Ludovic =?iso-8859-1?Q?Court=E8s?= Cc: guix-devel@gnu.org Ludovic Court=C3=A8s writes: > Dave Love skribis: > >> Alex Vong writes: >> >>> Based on the above general argument, I think we should list all the >>> licenses instead of just GPLv2+ since it would be inaccurate to say that >>> the whole program is under just GPLv2+. >> >> Indeed. Not only do you need to list the licences (according to all >> "legal advice" I've seen for distributions), but normally also >> distribute the relevant licence texts, even for permissive licences if >> they require that (e.g. BSD). I raised this recently, as it's not >> generally being done, so some Guix binary packages appear to be >> copyright-infringing. > > There=E2=80=99s no such thing as a =E2=80=9CGuix binary package=E2=80=9D = though, which makes it > different from traditional distros. > > In Guix a package is a Scheme object that refers to the source and build > method of upstream software. Sure, but if you use guix pack and distribute the result, it seems clearly a copyright infringement, because even BSD requires 2. Redistributions in binary form must reproduce the above copyright notice, this list of conditions and the following disclaimer in the documentation and/or other materials provided with the distribution. > One can always view the COPYING file by running, say: > > tar xf $(guix build -S glibc) glibc-2.25/COPYING > > This is of course suboptimal because the exact incantation varies from > package to package (in some cases there=E2=80=99s no such file.) > > Thoughts? > > Ludo=E2=80=99. Well, from what I know about copyright, that isn't the licence of glibc, which is the sum of all the licences involved, and you'd have to know how to find them if you didn't just unpack the tarball. With pack output in a lot of cases you don't have the information.