From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: ludo@gnu.org (Ludovic =?utf-8?Q?Court=C3=A8s?=)
Subject: Re: Netpbm
Date: Mon, 21 Jan 2013 11:27:08 +0100
Message-ID: <87622qg7b7.fsf@gnu.org>
References: <201301191803.17290.andreas@enge.fr> <87vcarqzgy.fsf@gnu.org>
	<201301202340.23178.andreas@enge.fr>
	<201301210017.31083.andreas@enge.fr>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Return-path: <bug-guix-bounces+gcggb-bug-guix=m.gmane.org@gnu.org>
Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([208.118.235.92]:45057)
	by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <ludo@gnu.org>) id 1TxEat-0001HT-Df
	for bug-guix@gnu.org; Mon, 21 Jan 2013 05:27:12 -0500
Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <ludo@gnu.org>) id 1TxEas-0006CQ-Aa
	for bug-guix@gnu.org; Mon, 21 Jan 2013 05:27:11 -0500
Received: from mail1-relais-roc.national.inria.fr ([192.134.164.82]:40032)
	by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from <ludo@gnu.org>)
	id 1TxEar-0006CC-Gj
	for bug-guix@gnu.org; Mon, 21 Jan 2013 05:27:10 -0500
In-Reply-To: <201301210017.31083.andreas@enge.fr> (Andreas Enge's message of
	"Mon, 21 Jan 2013 00:17:31 +0100")
List-Id: Bug reports for GNU Guix <bug-guix.gnu.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/options/bug-guix>,
	<mailto:bug-guix-request@gnu.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/bug-guix>
List-Post: <mailto:bug-guix@gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:bug-guix-request@gnu.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-guix>,
	<mailto:bug-guix-request@gnu.org?subject=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: Andreas Enge <andreas@enge.fr>
Cc: bug-guix@gnu.org

Andreas Enge <andreas@enge.fr> skribis:

> Am Sonntag, 20. Januar 2013 schrieb Andreas Enge:
>> This is more annoying, I will investigate and try to remove non-free
>> parts.
>
> Now I remember, the one marked non-free is already not distributed;=20
> instead, the binary explains how to get the real code. I dropped it since=
=20
> it advertises non-free software.
>
> Of those without license according to debian, two actually are marked as=
=20
> public domain; I dropped all others.

OK, great.

> Now it just remains to decide what to put into the license field.

Seems like it=E2=80=99s either GPLv2+ or GPLv2-only.  Is there a v2-only fi=
le?

Thanks!

Ludo=E2=80=99.